Development and Implementation of an E-Vehicle Allocation Optimized System for Corporate Usage

Contents

1 Introduction
1.1 Motivation 1.1.1 Shift towards E-Mobility 1.1.2 Need for an E-Vehicle Sharing System in Paris
1.2 Research Objective
1.3 Thesis Structure

2 Literature Review
2.1 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
2.1.1 Home Charging Equipment
2.1.2 Semi-Public Charging Points
2.1.3 Public Charging Stations
2.2 Electric Vehicle Charging Modes
2.2.1 Mode
2.2.2 Mode
2.2.3 Mode
2.2.4 Mode
2.3 Understanding Car-Sharing Systems
2.3.1 Car-Sharing Principles
2.3.2 Car-Sharing Models
2.3.3 Market Analysis of Car-Sharing Providers
2.4 Case Study Selection - Autolib

3 Design and Cost Evaluation of Electric Vehicle Charging Station
3.1 E-Vehicle Sharing System Technology
3.2 Technological Architecture of E-Vehicle Sharing System
3.3 Requirements for Building an E-Vehicle Sharing System for P3 Office
3.3.1 Planning Background
3.3.2 Operational Issues
3.3.3 Station Design
3.3.4 Station Installation and Costs

4 User Experience Design for the Need of P3 Employees
4.1 Data Collection
4.1.1 Survey Design
4.1.2 Mobility Habits and Journey Scenarios
4.2 User Interface Design
4.2.1 Use Case Scenarios .
4.2.2 Application Mockup

5 Development of an E-Vehicle Sharing Optimization Model
5.1 Problem Formulation
5.1.1 Mathematical Model
5.1.2 Graph Theory
5.2 Model Description
5.2.1 Parameter Settings
5.2.2 Model Approach - Time Independent
5.2.3 Model Approach - Time Dependent
5.3 Model Implementation
5.3.1 Grey Wolf Optimizer
5.3.2 Modeling in MATLAB
5.4 Results and Analysis

6 Conclusion and Outlook
6.1 Summary
6.2 Limitations
6.3 Future Research

Bibliography

List of Figures

List of Tables

List of Abbreviations

Acknowledgment

In the following lines, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to all those who encouraged and supported me along the way of my master studies.

My foremost gratitude is dedicated to my dissertation advisor, Prof. Dr. Thomas Hamacher at the Technical University of Munich, for sharing expertise, valuable guidance, and encouragement. Anytime I needed support, he made his time available for me and helped me with beneficial advice and direction whilst allowing me the room to work in my own way.

Furthermore, I also thank my supervisor Rosemarie Fryzowicz for her great assistance of proofreading and fruitful discussions considering the project. I take this opportunity to acknowledge all of the P3 colleagues for their helpful remarks and useful comments during my thesis process.

Finally, I must express my very profound gratefulness to my parents for providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout my education time. Words cannot express how grateful I am to my family for all of the sacrifices that they have made on my behalf.

Abstract

This thesis is an initial approach to analyze the design and implementation of an e-vehicle sharing system in the P3 Group office in Paris. An overview of the electric vehicle charging infrastructure, along with the relevant aspects of charging modes is provided. A showcase of the analysis of different car-sharing models within Europe is given, after which a specific case study is analyzed in greater detail. The parameters and features for the system were derived from a competitive benchmark of the car-sharing models on the market today. The objective was to assist the company in planning and managing a corporate e-vehicle sharing system in a profitable way while offering the employees good quality service. Therefore, the cost of designing and installing the P3 EV charging station was evaluated. On this matter, empirical data was gathered from P3 employees to better understand their daily commute, their needs and their expectations of the system. An optimization model for distances, cost and charging patterns was discussed and formalized as an integer linear program in MATLAB. Given the complexity inherent to this optimization model, stochastic distribution was employed to minimize the cost for the company, taking into consideration the trips paid and the costs involved–namely, the personal wage of an employee. A focus on the optimal design of an e-vehicle sharing system was necessary, while considering the problem’s dimensionality (number of vehicles, parking places, battery capacities, etc.) and employee relocation time. This study determines if the system provides higher net benefits to the company than available transportation alternatives. As a result of this pricing comparison, a significant reduction in total cost could be achieved for the company. The data set conclusively supports the implementation of the e-vehicle sharing system, which provides a decreased cost versus the use of public transportation. A possible avenue of future research is to extend the functionality of the developed model by adding a responsive user demand and possibly, maximizing the car-sharing ridership between employees.

1 Introduction

This thesis is written as part of the Chair of Renewable and Sustainable Energy Systems at the Technical University of Munich. The research was performed at the management consulting and engineering solution company P3 Group, located in Paris, where an e-vehicle sharing system was designed for future implementation. This chapter details the root idea of e-mobility and the motivation for this master thesis. Then, the objective of the thesis is explained in combination with the methodology and structure of the present work.

1.1 Motivation

This section starts with a brief introduction about the global shift towards the field of e-mobility in general and then explains the need behind setting up an e-vehicle sharing system in P3 office in Paris.

1.1.1 Shift towards E-Mobility

Decarbonization, reduction of fine particulate matter, and the awakening green buyer behavior are a few reasons why researchers and experts are busy developing electric mobility concepts for the future. This is namely because electric vehicles (EV) have been identified as one of the potential ways that can drive Europe towards greater sustainability by reducing pollutant criteria and greenhouse gas emissions associated with the transportation sector. EVs have significantly expanded into urban areas at a high pace in recent years and are expected to play a key role in creating diverse new markets and future technologies.

While the electric vehicle market is still at a relatively early stage of development, it is poised to reshape the nature of today’s industries as more companies are creating business cases and researching into this disruptive technology. Without a doubt, a cascade of various interesting application cases is emerging - the ultimate in technology is still yet to be seen, leading the way in unprecedented services time and again [1].

The EVs’ limited driving range and high purchase costs strongly limit their popularity. Thus, the deployment of EVs in the car-sharing (CS) fleets is an effective strategy to overcome these initial challenges, and to deal with both environmental and transporta- tion issues. These systems have a positive impact on urban mobility by providing high flexibility to the users and allowing them to enjoy their daily out of car experiences. These systems have evolved through several technological generations to increase ro- bustness and improve the user features. The need for car-sharing is crucial to decrease the land needed for parking since a higher population density leads to more demand.

Including EVs into car-sharing systems can bring multiple advantages to the cities that will help solve today’s traffic problems and realize a common vision of emissions-free mobility [2]. Fundamentally, players in the mobility sector are reinventing themselves thanks to the enormous role of connected e-mobility. The connection of EVs to each other and their connection to charging infrastructure has the potential to revolutionize EV-related services and the ways people around the world commute. Thus, this represents a key technological development for the future of the e-vehicle sector.

The increase of environmental awareness, the rise of sharing economies, and the popularity of smartphones are the main drivers that can leverage the e-vehicle sharing concept. The demand for mobility concepts and maximum flexibility is prompting people to use these services and demonstrate that some of them are willing to sacrifice individual forms of mobility, in favor of other modes of transport such as car-sharing.

1.1.2 Need for an E-Vehicle Sharing System in Paris

In prior periods, efforts to produce agreements on transport priorities were obstructed by ongoing conflict across levels of government and between political parties, state- owned companies, and other key decision makers in Paris [3]. As a result, car-sharing has been well-received as an alternative solution with the aim of facilitating a move towards shared urban spaces.

Car-sharing can be positioned in three ways; however, this thesis focuses mainly on the service offered to companies and business locations, where employees could use the shared cars for business trips [4]. Factors influencing the success of an e-vehicle sharing system range from the built environment (such as infrastructures at work) to factors related to transportation availability and utility theory like cost and travel time. Requirements expanding the interest involve vehicle station location, the network infrastructure and the operation of the vehicle redistribution system. The stations must be located in close proximity to one another and to major transit hubs in order to make the e-vehicle sharing system ideal as a commuter transportation system [5].

The P3 Group wants to prevent the employee from having to go on business trips with his or her own car. Employees will no longer require their private car, but will be encouraged to use means of mobility that are fast, comfortable, and environmentally- friendly. Additionally, the car-sharing solution is brought into the company as a pool vehicle that could be reserved depending on each employees’ needs during certain well-defined periods. It has the potential to support several transportation planning goals related to parking, cost and flexible mobility.

The new scheme will help benefit the company on both environmental and cost-saving factors. It would be a complement or even a substitute for the bus and train without waiting at the stop. Accessibility, vehicle diversity, technology, and travel cost variables have the strongest influence on the success of the system.

From the interview with the employees, the majority of interviewees mentioned that the main challenges ahead of them in Paris are the strike and long delays of public transportation. Schedule inflexibility and loss of time were also listed as annoyances because it can be very hard to accommodate en route stops or change what already is a very rigid pattern. All of this translates to the company loosing money.

Public transportation is a part of the mobility solution; however, even an excellent public transport network cannot cover all employees’ mobility needs. Various parameters exist that limit the effectiveness of public transport, for instance, service to remote areas, long distances, and bad weather conditions [6].

Public transportation has not always satisfied the travel demand of passengers since schedules are provided in advance. Therefore, customers have a lack of control, which is not only the case while driving, but also while planning a route or waiting for a ride. This can result in a serious loss of time for travelers and reduce the flexibility of their trips. Furthermore, sometimes employees need to transfer within one trip to reach their destination, which then increases the total journey period and results in a waste of time. This waiting time for the next bus or train after their business meeting might also slow their return to the office or to their homes. This reliability issue limits the willingness to travel with the different PTs within one journey [7].

Traditional public transports, including buses, trains, and tramways fail at providing a great flexibility in terms of covered area and time availability. Therefore, the car-sharing system is a necessary and a suitable solution to meet the employees’ requirements since it brings out compelling advantages and increases the employee convenience in the form of access and availability.

Car-sharing can provide tremendous cost savings for the company. These savings could be achieved by choosing to go electric. Compared to the petrol car, the costs for full EV are cheaper even taking into consideration the charging costs and the savings per kilometer. Increasing the range drastically increases the cost of the battery electric vehicle (BEV) because of the increased battery pack, whereas enlarging the gas tank of the internal combustion engine (ICE) presents no added cost. Therefore, the BEV is more cost effective than the ICE for shorter driving ranges [8].

Overall, the volume of traffic and costs are reduced without necessarily decreasing the frequency of automobile use. By saving on taxes, fuel costs, maintenance, and insurance costs, the total cost of ownership is significantly reduced in the long-term [9].

One of the most important quantities to assess the viability of EVs is the daily mobility distance, which provides information regarding the total kilometer travelled per trip. This distance can impact the reported autonomy of electric vehicles, which might suffer from a limited range between recharging. However, this range limitation is not a problem in the present e-vehicle sharing system, primarily when the trip distances are small. In that matter, EVs are usually used for a shorter time and fewer kilometres per trip and day than drivers of vehicles with internal combustion engines [10]. In this work’s modeled system, all trips initiated on the same day for both clients occur in the metropolitan area of Paris and its direct periphery. These trips are considered short-distance journeys, approximately between 3 and 30 km.

1.2 Research Objective

The aim of this thesis is to propose a plan, design, and implement a corporate e-vehicle sharing system. The first part of the research was a review of the existing literature on electric vehicle infrastructure and car-sharing models to identify their current service and compare the type of technologies they provide. The second part involved a study of the requirements to build the service as well as a cost estimation for setting up this system at the office in Paris. The third part included a series of interviews with P3 employees to understand how they perceive their daily travel challenges and solicit features on the implementation of the e-vehicle sharing system. The scope of this project analyzed the commuting challenges of employees between the office and the client sites, and developed a concept providing improved value and more flexibility for the employees. The fourth and final part’s goal was to come up with a mathematical model for calculating distances, cost, and charging patterns. Based on this model, the best choices are found and suggested to the users of the e-vehicle sharing system.

1.3 Thesis Structure

The structure of this work is laid out according to the desired outcomes. The thesis’ structure is divided into five separate chapters, where each chapter analyzes the research questions related to the information. A review and classification of the charging infras- tructures as well as the charging modes are presented in Chapter 2. The presentation of the work developed in the framework of the different EV service sharing models follows in the second part. In the same chapter, a specific case study of an e-vehicle sharing system is subsequently analyzed taking various criteria into consideration. After presenting the basic principle of car-sharing concepts, the need for an e-vehicle sharing system is followed by identifying the wanted and needed features in the service.

In Chapter 3, the requirements for building such a system as well as the definition and implementation of the different factors are discussed. Installation steps for the charging station are stated and a cost analysis is conducted.

In the course of Chapter 4, the design and an evaluation of the potential concerning the e-vehicle sharing system is made based on the data collected from the employees. The shared experiences of users are considered to give insight into how they use car-sharing. From this interpretation, the smart journey scenarios are described, travel patterns are considered and various participant profiles are distinguished. By the end of the chapter, an app mock up is outlined to translate the need into a concrete user interface and the IT architecture behind such a system is described.

In Chapter 5, the insights from previous chapters are applied to the domain of software implementation. The first part of the chapter is dedicated to the description of the problem and explanation of the appropriate mathematical model and its related constraints. Afterwards, the model architecture, the entities and their relationships are defined. This chapter also integrates an explanation of the core optimization algorithm that is based on the mathematical problem formalization. In order to evaluate the efficiency of the model, the results are analyzed and evaluated in the last section of the chapter to outline the central contributions of the work.

Finally, an outlook of the main findings and insights are summarized in Chapter 6 by establishing an understanding of the analyzed data and discussing a future work. The presented work is organized to allow the company to grasp the opportunities behind setting up an e-vehicle sharing system in the office. The appendix contains a version of the survey and the MATLAB source code of the data analysis.

2 Literature Review

In order to fully understand the technologies and physical aspects behind e-vehicle sharing systems, a broad classification of the e-vehicle infrastructure along with specific examples of the equipment, the relevant charging technologies as well as a study of the interplay between human and vehicle are presented and generated. To clearly determine the reason for increased attention has recently been given to such vehicles as a transport system, the various charging modes are outlined. The different on-demand mobility service providers, which are currently experiencing a significant growth, are presented and the analysis of a concrete case study is outlined.

2.1 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

This sub-chapter presents the different EV charging infrastructures in the market and investigates the potential of existing power networks in accommodating future infrastructures. A detailed explanation is outlined regarding the particular categories of charging stations, which are generally divided into private, semi-public, and public charging points.

For a deeper understanding regarding the e-vehicle drive-train technology, a focus on the infrastructure present in the market is investigated, including factors such as component properties and placement. In the future, infrastructure like intersections and streetlights will probably be able to communicate with vehicles, buses, or even pedestrians to help drivers reduce congestion and increase safety. Electric mobility is ultimately not just limited to the vehicle, but it also encompasses the complex issue of the necessary established infrastructure and operated network. The development of the charging infrastructure is currently at the top of to-do list of many countries and companies because an easy and quick adoption of EVs is possible only if there are efficient charging infrastructures available.

Vast EV charging infrastructures cover homes, workplaces, and public areas, which must be ready with the charging stations or electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) [11]. In most European countries, the few thousand public charging points installed by authorities, utilities, and electric vehicle manufacturers are for slow charging. It is essential for all the public and private sectors, especially the distribution network operators (DNO) to analyze the ability of the existing power networks in meeting the significant demand due to EVs. The non-domestic or workplace charging stations are deployed to top up the charge of the vehicle in general [12].

2.1.1 Home Charging Equipment

These charging points are located in homes and business premises and work at 220 240V, typically at either 16 or 32A. The 16A charging point can charge an electric car from flat to full in around 6 hours, whereas, the 32A charging point can fully charge an electric vehicle in around 3½ hours [13]. The overnight charging is suitable for low- and medium-range plug-in hybrids and for all-electric batteries with low daily driving usage.

Several EV manufacturers offer free installation of home charging equipment for customers when an EV is purchased. The German Government declared a grant of 4,000 € for domestic charge point. This is known as the environmental bonus including VAT for every individual eligible EV owner [14].

The home charge device can charge any compatible electric vehicle and is conceived as a mobile device because its hardware and software components are personalized to a specific car model and to a particular national grid. An example of a home charging wall mounted installation is illustrated in Figure 2.1.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.1 – Domestic EV charger Level 2 developed by Bosch [15]

The Bosch EV200 series in Figure 2.1 is a charger Level 2 that charge the majority of electric vehicles from different manufacturers worldwide with multiple power output and different charging cable length options. This model is a 30 amp charger and comes with a 25 feet cord [15].

2.1.2 Semi-Public Charging Points

These charging points are situated on a private ground; however, these can be accessed by external customers. For instance, charging stations located in commercial car parks, shopping centers, parking grounds of supermarkets or leisure facilities where the access is restricted to the customers. Semi-public charging stations can be connected to an existing grid connection of the adjacent building or can own an individual grid connection, where the object is often operated by a charging point operator.

2.1.3 Public Charging Stations

These charging points are for shared usage and usually found on-street in all parking environments such as offices, supermarkets and fleets. Their infrastructure usually consists of standalone charging poles. The European Commission suggested in 2013 a national target of 150,000 public charging points and 1403 fast chargers by the end of 2016 in Germany [16]. Public charging stations are classified as slow, fast, and rapid charging stations depending on the output power delivered. They are usually floor mounted and available with twin sockets delivering the output power of 3.7kW, 7kW,22kW, and 50kW [17]. The charging compatible EVSE is shown in Figure 2.2.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.2 – Floor mounted EV supply equipment [18]

The charging speed of public stations is expected to be similar to the conventional refueling. For this reason, researchers are focusing on increasing the output power rate and therefore decreasing the charging period. Fast charging locations require large high-voltage systems to supply each charging point with individual direct current (DC) power depending on the charging circumstances as illustrated in Figure 2.3. Charging capacities higher than 150 kW depend on significantly higher charging currents, which means that larger cable cross-sections or even cables with liquid cooling have to be deployed. Such a fast charging station has a modular design of power units (using 10 50kW power blocks) and has the possibility of easy and cost-effective expansion [18].

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.3 – Schematic for an ultra-fast charging location

Ultra-fast charging is possible for up to 1000 V/350 A. Thus, cables and connectors must be liquid cooled to reduce weight. This is because the voltage doubles and the current exceeds the limit values for passively cooled cables and connectors (200 A). Without liquid cooling, the cables for ultra-fast charging are very difficult to install. Possible solutions, known as robotic loading or automated charging such as the Tesla Snake charger [19] are currently being investigated.

2.2 Electric Vehicle Charging Modes

This section describes the possible charging classifications for infrastructure, how the corresponding technological solutions work in principle, and presents the time needed for an EV battery to be charged.

For the integration of EVs in electrical grids, it is very important to know about the rules which apply. For charging the vehicles with electric power, different advanced ways and practical technological solutions exist. Electric vehicle charging batteries can be plugged in with a connector or a cable-connected charging system (conductive charging). Batteries can also be recharged via electromagnetic induction, which means that the charging current is transmitted without contact (inductive charging). The depleted battery can also be replaced by a charged battery (battery swapping).

In conductive charging processes, there is an electrically conductive connection between the vehicle and the infrastructure side, which is usually realized by a charging cable. In inductive charging systems; however, the energy is transferred between the vehicle and the infrastructure contactlessly by means of an alternating magnetic field via 2 coils. A distinction is set between alternating current (AC), where every vehicle needs to have its own on-board equipment, and a DC charging, where the infrastructure investment is shared with hundreds of users in the form of the electrically transmitted voltage.

Being an intermediary between the power source and the vehicle’s charging port, the EVSE relays the AC power to the vehicle safely. Its charging capacity is a significant consideration as the EVSE options have a direct bearing on how fast the batteries can be recharged. The use of higher power to charge the vehicle can significantly reduce the time required to recharge batteries.

The charging power Pch(W) is then calculated as a product of a charging current Iev(A) to charge the batteries and a voltage Uev(V) through the formula [20]:

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

The energy delivered to the batteryEch (kWh) over a period of time tch is obtained through [20]:

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Today, the current standard available in Europe, dealing with the charging system, plugs, and sockets, are contained in the European International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC 62196). The actual standard provides a first classification of the four categories of charging modes in function of its rated power, and thus of its time of recharge. This standard defines charging methods, communication signals as well as plug and socket-outlet designs, and is adopted by most European EV manufacturers [21].

The different system approaches for loading EV mainly depend on the output power supply, protection, and communication facilities. To provide the necessary safety and charging energy that matches the demand, the four different charging modes are defined and explained in the following sections.

2.2.1 Mode 1

The first mode as suggested by the IEC 62196 is the AC charging mode, where the electric vehicle is connected to voltage levels of 120V (US) and 230V (EU) AC that is available from the distribution feeders into the house. Normal household or industrial power sockets supply a low current that does not exceed 16A and capable of charging light vehicles like mopeds. This corresponds to a charging capacity of 3.7 kW for single-phase charging or 11 kW for three-phase charging.

The BS 1363, 13A socket and BS EN 60309-2, 16A socket, highlighted in blue and green in Figure 2.4, are not designed for EV charging purposes which, usually are comprised of an in-cable control box. Therefore, the socket outlet must be protected by a fault current protection device. In practice, this charging mode can only be used as an emergency charging option with reduced power since no special residual-current device (RCD) protection is available on the connection between vehicle and socket to prevent serious injury from fatal shocks. Therefore, the use of mode 1 is prohibited in some countries such as the United States [22].

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.4 – Charging EV in Mode 1

2.2.2 Mode 2

In this AC charging mode displayed in Figure 2.5, the electric vehicle is connected to a power supply similar to mode 1. This charging level is designed to work in AC (1 phase or 3 phase) with voltage levels of 240 V (US) and 400 V (EU). In addition to the 13A household pin, 3-pin outlet socket and 16A industrial socket, this mode supports up to a maximum of 32 A (single-phase 7.4 kW, three-phase 22 kW).

This charging mode uses a special charging cable with integrated control and protection device In-Cable Control Box (ICCB). The ICCB includes a communication device and ensures the charging process by increasing the protection level. The output power delivered from the power sockets and the input power to the battery in the EV do not need to be similar. Although there are benefits of the minor installation costs and in-cable RCD protection, this mode takes a long time (8 to 12 hours) to fully charge the battery [22].

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.5 – Charging EV in Mode 2

2.2.3 Mode 3

In this mode shown in Figure 2.6, a dedicated charge point with a permanent installation of RCD and surge protection is connected to the mains. This mode of charging describes single- or three-phase AC supply with a maximum current of 63 A. Accordingly, charging capacities from 3.7 to a maximum of 43.5 kW can be achieved.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.6 – Charging EV in Mode 3

The charging operation takes place via a charging station, usually a Wallbox, where the control and protection function and the communication module are permanently installed. The charger itself is built into the vehicle. A home charging station in the form of a Wallbox is now offered by most vehicle manufacturers. Mode 3 is the recommended AC method for day-to-day charging compared to other modes due to the inclusion of important smart features, such as an ICT connection between the EV and the charging equipment, the protection and the energy measurable parameters in a way that the charging power is controlled during the charging period [22].

The two different charging methods available in this mode are:

- Charging point with a tethered cable, usually installed in households.
- Charging station with a dedicated socket, commonly installed in public areas.

2.2.4 Mode 4

In this DC charging mode, the EV is charged rapidly using an off-board charger and a high-voltage, often 400–500 V direct current. Rectifiers are used inside the charging station to convert the AC to DC. This charging method is mainly installed in highways and service centers, where 80% of a typical EV battery can be charged in as little as 30 minutes. Therefore, this charging method is not convenient for domestic installations due to the output of high voltage and current, which are up to 500 V and 200 A. There are rivaling connector standards in Mode 4 in Europe, most notably the Japanese CHAdeMO and the European Combo 2 or Combined Charging System (CCS). The CCS Combo 2 Type 2 connector, which is essentially the Mennekes connector, was chosen as the standard to be used in public charging stations in the EU [22].

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.7 – Charging EV in Mode 4

Mode 4 has an effective communication facility with EV similar to mode 3. However, the frequent use of DC charging stations causes a high load on the distribution network and reduces the life of the battery. To realize charging times of just a few ten minutes, there are concepts for DC quick charging stations. Charging currents of up to 200A were technically possible with the CCS in the current state of technology. Although, higher currents are needed to achieve shorter charging times. This led to the High Power Charging (HPC) technology that makes charging currents of up to 500A achievable and an electric strength of up to 1000 V DC [23]. An efficient DC power charging technology assures the most dynamic way of charging multiple high power EVs, achieving accurate sensing and control of power output directly to the vehicle battery. The intelligent HPC technology is based on a cooling system that provides a charge three times faster, without compromising on safety or manageability.

The way high power charging works is outlined in Figure 2.8. As the electrical power grid contributes AC current and batteries can store only DC current, the electricity provided by the grid to the electric vehicle must be converted. Therefore, two kinds of transformers are deployed when investigating the connection of a HPC station. The first transformer converts the high-level (HV) to the mid-level (MV). The second transformer connects the charging station to the MV network. It converts the MV to the low-level (LV) at which the charging station is operated. The DC fast-charging station has integrated inverters in order to convert the AC electricity from the grid into DC current for the electric vehicle.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.8 - High power charging communication

As outlined before, each of the four charging technology modes can involve different combinations of power level, types of electric current used and plug types. The EV charging currents as well as the grid connection types are summarized according to the International Standard IEC 61851-1, as shown in Table 2.1 below:

Table 2.1 – Summary comparison of charging levels

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

2.3 Understanding Car-Sharing Systems

The emergence of a new paradigm will require innovations for future individual mobility and business models. Currently, electromobility and car-sharing are seen as likely future scenarios. Several studies have tried to determine the potential of car-sharing systems by considering different angles and applying various methodologies [24]. Most studies analyze the reservation behavior and demand of car-sharing users considering booking data, customer surveys or interviews with experts from the field.

This section is dedicated to the analysis of car-sharing systems. A description of their operational principles is firstly presented. More particularly, some specifications and characteristics, highlighting their advantage as an interesting alternative to actual transportation issues, are stated.

2.3.1 Car-Sharing Principles

The terminology of car-sharing has changed a lot over time and undergone a granular differentiation depending on the specific setup and location. The main idea of car- sharing is based on the vehicle usage rather than private vehicle possession, with the aim of lowering car usage and increasing mobility. It is a flexible and sustainable alternative form of transport that is complementary to public transport, rental cars, and taxis [25]. It is important to state that car-sharing is different from car-pooling. Car-pooling represents the use of a private car by several persons at the same time for the similar trip or ride. In contrast, car-sharing serves different persons at distinct times, and thus, for different trips. It is about sharing the vehicles while car-pooling is about sharing rides [26].

The history of car-sharing started in 1948 with the operation of a small cooperative car club known as Sefage in Zurich, Switzerland [4]. Structured short-term car rental services became more outstanding in Europe in the early 1990s with services such as Statt in Germany. Zipcar ¹, an American car club, appeared in 2000 in Boston, Massachusetts. The popularity of car-sharing initiatives took off and many services came into existence. They were created principally for individuals who could not afford to purchase a private vehicle.

Car-sharing service providers have been entering major cities around the world as a competition with other forms of means of transportation, especially taxis. The car-sharing approach has the advantage of filling the mobility gap between public transport, taxis, and car rental. Offering the flexibility of a privately owned car without the associated fixed costs, this alternative mode of transportation operates and maintains a service to facilitate the interaction of other stakeholders and appear as a single point of contact for them.

From 2006 to 2012, the number of car-sharing members increased from 346,610 to 1,788,027 around the world, and the corresponding number of vehicles raised from 11,501 to 43,554 [27]. The worldwide exponential distribution of members per continent is visually represented in Figure 2.9 [25], where North America and Europe are the predominant markets of car-sharing activities. To summarize, the car-sharing growth has increased, mostly occurring in Europe, then it has expanded into North America, Asia, and Australia.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.9 – Percentage distribution of worldwide car-sharing membership [25]

As a conclusion, it can be affirmed that car-sharing is attractive, and aims at decreasing individual car ownership and improving urban land use. The concept’s popularity of car-sharing will keep on growing in the future, where the yearly estimated increase in members to be around 20% - 30% [28].

2.3.2 Car-Sharing Models

The car-sharing service is growing all over Europe, allowing users to rent a vehicle for a short period of time, with the cost of usage based on kilometers and time driven. Many implementations of car-sharing systems currently exist and they are adopting many different forms. Multiple business models compete in the car-sharing market. Within this section, a description of the existing different types of car-sharing is given. The focus lies in analyzing the different elements of which the business model is built.

There is currently a strong vitality in the car-sharing market, where different vehicle- sharing providers such as Car2Go ² from Daimler, DriveNow ³ from BMW, and Autolib’⁴ from Bolloré are found all over Europe. Such companies provide the service within metropolitan areas, which can be based on a subscription or per-use fee. Their value proposition is based on delivering an environmental friendly transportation service, offering flexible urban mobility.

Car-sharing services have already significantly disrupted the mobility market and have opened new field opportunities for transport operators. Transportation network firms like Uber and Lyft, as well as car-sharing companies, have become increasingly popular, as these services alter how people relate to the cities they live in and travel to. A prospect of disruption is embracing the whole mobility ecosystem, uniting different transport modes and providers under a single platform.

The digital mobility has enabled the development and deployment of many different forms of car-sharing and ride-sharing services that shaped a change in the automotive business model from selling cars to selling mobility cars. A differentiation with refer- ence to the distinct car-sharing business models is necessary. Each approach exhibits appropriate characteristics when it comes to the product offering, flexible subscription models, pick-up and return, fleet variety as well as ownership structure.

Figure 2.10 presents the different mobility concepts that can be classified by the degree of flexibility offered to users, as well as, the distance travelled, which takes in consideration variation in usage areas from urban to regional. Car-sharing is typically not used for long distance trips, neither it is used for traveling very short distances, where one would prefer riding a bicycle, walking or a taking taxi [29]. Generally, car- sharing is used as a substitution for public transport and is constrained to intermediate distance trips around the city. Free-floating models provide a high-level of flexibility compared to other modes of transport and compete with new mobility providers such as Uber or mytaxi, while stationary models are utilized for longer drives and tend to substitute rental or ownership cars.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.10 – Classification of car-sharing mobility concepts

Car-sharing provider is a system by which a number of vehicles in different places are made available by an external organization for its residents. Based on the literature, different ways to build the car-sharing business model are found and can be divided into three main ones:

- Free-floating
- Stationary
- Peer-to-peer (P2P)

These business models can cater to either business-to-consumer (B2C) or business-to- business (B2B). A wide range of individual car-sharing business models have emerged over time, that can principally be divided into two models. The first concept shares both a vehicle and driver such as Uber for short-distance ride-sharing, and Blablacar for long-distance journeys. The second type shares the vehicle that is self-driven, which includes peer-to-peer schemes like Car Amigo, point to point station-based systems such as Cambio, and free-floating car-sharing such as Car2Go or ZenCar that only uses electric cars.

After the outlining the principle of car-sharing, and since for many city dwellers, owning a car can be a major hassle, a detailed overview of the different models is given in the following subsections.

Free-Floating

Free-floating car-sharing (FFCS) refers to a non-round journey, which means, one which can be used for point A - B trips that tend to be much more convenient for errand running. This is mainly used for short one-way trips as an alternative to taxis and is inherently relying on information services to notify users about the current position of available cars. Since that the operating areas of the providers are mainly in city centers, most free-floating providers offer small to medium-sized cars that are relatively easy to park.

Free-floating allows customers to pick up and return the vehicle anywhere. This principle does not only emphasize the sharing, but the flexible use aspect – a constantly available car fleet fulfilling mobility needs on demand. On the downside, the service provider must overcome immense challenges in making the process work well.

Many free-floating providers are owned by OEMs such as Car2Go by Daimler and like DriveNow, a joint venture between BMW and Sixt. Free-floating car-sharing advantages are:

- Vehicles are spread out across the city.
- No specific pick-up and return points are specified - picked up and returned anywhere within a prescribed area.
- Standardized fees and usage times are calculated in minute intervals.

Free-floating car-sharing is a relatively new market segment, therefore, the opinions differ on whether it will contribute to a reduction of private car ownership in the same way as station-based systems.

Stationary

Stationary car-sharing service provides long and planned round trips with the start and end points being the same. Thanks to the interesting hour and kilometer packages offered, this concept is ideal for longer journeys. This round trip car-sharing replaces rental cars or (second) car ownership and the rental time period is usually specified in advance. This model is not very flexible for car-sharing companies or users since customers users can reserve the vehicle of their choice at a certain station for a specific period of time.

Stationary systems have fixed stations, therefore, they are closed-off and inflexible, since users can’t just drop off the vehicle at a location that is most convenient for them. Customers need to find a parking space available at the fixed station and have to return to designated parking areas.

The benefit of using stationary-based car-sharing advantages are:

- Vehicles are located at stations covering a specific area.
- Vehicles need to be returned to the same pick-up station.
- Standardized fees and usage time are calculated in one-hour intervals or kilometers driven.
- The service mainly replaces traditional car rental.

Stationary car-sharing approach involves more the ”transport of goods of non-daily needs” and ”one-day excursions”, since it can be very closed-off and inflexible. Although the stationary model is reliable and simple, it can also be more expensive to operate than other systems. Parking lots, building infrastructure, and location management staff can significantly increase the overhead expenses.

Peer-to-Peer

Peer-to-peer car-sharing model is characterized by round-trip usage episodes. The and benefit key distinction with the round-trip model is that the car-sharing fleet is decentralized and owned by ordinary individuals not owned by a central operator. This is an approach, in which private vehicle owners temporarily rent out their personal automobiles to other people in their surrounding area. Rather than parked in the driveway, at the workplace or in the airport parking lot, the user’s vehicle is available for someone else to rent. This model is an innovative step toward more affordable car rentals in the new sharing economy. A third-party insurance during this rental period is provided to keep a portion of the rental amount in return for facilitating the transaction. Compared to other forms of car-sharing, a more varied selection of vehicles is typically available to users, as the fleet is not being centrally-managed.

There are car-sharing operators that use a P2P model, including Getaround and Turo, and P2P bike-sharing operators such as Spinlister that allows the sharing of personal bicycles. Turo takes a 25% commission from the vehicle owner and 10% from the renter. Getaround takes 40% from the owner for their services. FlightCar is another P2P car-sharing company that provides free airport parking and compensation on a per-mile basis to owners who agree to share their vehicle while on their trip.

Private P2P car-sharing advantages are:

- Private vehicles rented out by their owners.
- Located at the owner’s home and returned to the same place.
- Cars covered by special insurance for the rental duration.
- Fees specified by car owners.

Peer-to-peer car-sharing has been implemented on a local level in a neighborhood or among acquaintances in different areas to reduce the environmental impact of driving and decrease the use of private transportation.

2.3.3 Market Analysis of Car-Sharing Providers

The car-sharing industry is fragmented in nature with many key stakeholders entering the market, including car-sharing companies, connected hardware solutions providers, and mobility platform providers. Some of the companies in the industry are Car2Go, Autolib', DriveNow, and Zipcar. With technological advancements and the use of smartphones , the mobility market is attracting a high number of users.

All these mobility solutions are innovative services that address the users' needs in different situations and offer operational advantages over previous fleet-based models. Reasons for the car-sharing success includes additional flexibility through increased mobility options and effectiveness as a transportation demand management.

The features offered by the various car-sharing service providers are summarized in Figure 2.11. The fleet sizes of companies are developing and implementing apps available for iOS Android that facilitate a smooth user interface and provide a more convenient customer experience. Using a mobile app, customers can quickly search, locate, reserve, and access nearby vehicles available for sharing.

All players can plan the routes and most of them offer the possibility to access the personal calendar of users. While DriveNow and Car2Go concentrate on the vehicle ownership, Zipcar allows members to travel easily from city to city under the same membership in other markets.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.11 - Analysis of the features offered by the existing car-sharing providers

The technologies supporting electric cars are currently not very well engineered, but some companies are either developing or adopting newer and better technologies that could play an important role in enhancing the fleet. In addition, some of the providers offer unique and convenient services in the form of free-floating car-sharing access. Most of the car models offered in the service are equipped with multiple sensors to monitor simplistic driving functionalities like the energy consumption and complex vehicle states.

For exploring the above described market, the research strategy of the single case study was chosen, according to the research matrix and different forms of case studies proposed by Yin [30]. In a first step the case study is described and its selection is justified. Then, it is followed by presenting the data collection and the gathering of features needed.

2.4 Case Study Selection - Autolib’

Increasing car mobility can lead to problems with respect to air quality and noise. A strategy to solve these issues could be on offering a more sustainable solution, a technological approach, which focuses on reducing the negative externalities of car mobility by using cleaner fuels and encouraging the use of car-sharing systems.

This section is performed to find out how the French market of car-sharing models look like today and to thoroughly understand its services offered. The maturity of the diverse market segments is analyzed, and future functionality possibilities are identified based on the findings of the study.

A benchmark is conducted for the French market in Figure 2.12 to get a deep insight into the current players in the market. A successful provider such as Autolib’ is expanding as a market leader in Paris. Autolib’ is connected to the aggregator Gireve, a partner of Hubject. The second biggest charging point operator (CPO) is Sodetrel, which is, in contrast to Autolib’, spread across the country and about to establish a DC fast charging network. Sodetrel is part of the Kiwhi network. Hence, it could be beneficial to cooperate with Autolib as well as Kiwhi, as Autolib’ is unfortunately not yet accessible with the Kiwhi pass.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2.12 – A market analysis about CPO and MSP in France

The chosen case study is Autolib’. The idea of analyzing Autolib’ arose in a succession of stages. It started with a general interest in information infrastructures and digital platforms as research fields. Due to the size of the market segment, and since this work is focused on Paris, a profound look at the wildly popular car-sharing service Autolib’ is realized in this section.

The e-vehicle sharing system Autolib’ is particularly suited to this research work, as its one-way car-sharing model means, that customers can find and rent the e-vehicles for short amounts of time. Autolib’ is the first government-initiated programme in France and the United Kingdom based entirely on one type of electric vehicle, the Bluecar, created by the Bolloré Group. The system is one of the most sustainable projects in Paris that launched the greening and the livability strategy for the city. This car-sharing service was created as an extension of the popular and renowned bike-sharing scheme, Vélib’ with the aim of reducing the number of cars, particularly in the center of Paris and decreasing noise through the use of EVs [31].

Currently, Autolib’ has around 1800 Bluecars, connected by an infrastructure of 800 stations with capacity ranging from one to six parking spots, meaning there are approximately 4,000 charging points in the city [32]. The general layout of an Autolib’ infrastructure in Paris is presented in Figure 2.13.

After seven years, Autolib’ is suddenly reported to be closing in the city due to extensive losses. The service is to end in days because the subscriptions payment started to stagnate and even decrease in the last years, but above all because the number of trips dropped substantially.

[...]

---

¹ www.zipcar.com

² www.car2go.com

³ www.drivenow.com

⁴ www.autolib.eu