Electric drive vehicles discussed in this report are defined below under categories (a) to (f). The now widely used ambiguous term PEV (plug-in electric vehicle) can mean any of the options (b) to (f). (a) hybrid electric vehicle (HEV). The HEV uses batteries but has no plug. An engine and gasoline provide most of the energy for movement. (b) plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). The PHEV has a battery charge depleting (CD) range less than 30 miles. The engine in most available versions comes on during CD mode. (c) extended range electric vehicle (EREV). The EREV has a charge depleting range of 35 to approximately 70 miles or more. The engine never comes on during CD mode. EREVs are often considered PHEVs. We generally distinguish them from PHEVs as in (b) for greater accuracy. (d) range extended battery electric vehicle (BEVx). The BEVx has a CD range of 70 miles or more and a small gasoline engine and fuel tank allowing range to be approximately doubled. (e) battery electric vehicle (BEV). Most of today’s BEVs have a range of less than 100 miles. (f) performance BEV. The Tesla Model S has a range of about 200 miles, high power and rapid acceleration. Chevrolet has plans to produce a 200 mile BEV within the next 5 years. Electric drive in the U.S. is a 21 century technology whose commercial success began with HEVs using nickel metal hydride (NiMH) battery chemistries introduced by several automakers. The overall U.S. history of the NiMH HEVs was an increasing success in passenger cars, but a failure in light-duty trucks. The later emergence of more powerful and compact batteries using various lithium-ion (li-ion) chemistries, as oil prices were steadily rising from 2002 to early 2008, resulted in significant enthusiasm first for PHEVs, and then BEVs. Expanding electric drive vehicle types and capabilities have resulted in increasing coverage of the highway vehicle market, both private and commercial. The following are the top five market niches identified in this report: 1. PHEVs and EREVs with workplace charging. This is a focus. It does not mean other PEVs should be excluded. How and whether to assess fees for charging at the workplace is a topic of discussion and evaluation. Avoiding EVSE electronic measurement equipment can lower EVSE cost by considerably more than half. Reduction of record keeping also reduces administrative cost. 2. BEVs and possibly EREVs & BEVx in air quality nonattainment areas. This niche includes (but is not confined to) states that have adopted California light-duty vehicle emissions standards and/or signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to promote PEVs that obtain zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) credits under the CA standards. Since the largest metro areas tend to have the most difficult air quality problems, the encouragement of BEVs requires installation at a high proportion of multiunit dwellings (MUDs), which has been found to involve high financial and management costs. Attention to MUD EVSE feasibility and/or development of workplace and other charging alternatives is particularly valuable in this niche. Working with developers, building owners, and operators, as well as associated professional organizations, will be crucial. 3. PHEVs, EREVs and BEVx's in cold climates. In coldest conditions engines often provide cabin and battery pack heat with lower GHG emissions than electricity from fossil fueled generation from the grid, while the engine and gasoline greatly enhance cold temperature range. Extreme losses of range for BEVs parked outdoors off the grid during cold snaps combined with snowstorms are particularly problematic. Consumer and dealer education is instrumental for this niche. 4. PHEVs, EREVs, and BEVx's in new construction (generally outer suburban). This minimizes EVSE cost. An important strategy is to write codes to impose pre-installation of conduit to support
[1]
Horst E. Friedrich,et al.
Comparison of energy consumption and costs of different HEVs and PHEVs in European and American context
,
2012
.
[2]
Michael A Nicholas,et al.
Charging for Charging: The Paradox of Free Charging and Its Detrimental Effect on the Use of Electric Vehicles
,
2013
.
[3]
Andrew Burnham,et al.
Reducing Light Duty Vehicle Fuel Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Combined Potential of Hybrid Technology and Behavioral Adaptation
,
2013
.
[4]
Chris Mi,et al.
5. Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles
,
2011
.
[5]
Anant D Vyas,et al.
An Analysis of Car and SUV Daytime Parking for Potential Opportunity Charging of Plug-in Electric Powertrains
,
2012
.
[6]
Jamie Davies,et al.
Charging Behavior Impacts on Electric VMT: Evidence from a 2013 California Drivers Survey
,
2014
.
[7]
Michael Nicholas,et al.
Studying the PEV market in california: Comparing the PEV, PHEV and hybrid markets
,
2013,
2013 World Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS27).
[8]
서정헌,et al.
반도체 공정 overview
,
2001
.
[9]
Matt Frades.
A Guide to the Lessons Learned from the Clean Cities Community Electric Vehicle Readiness Projects
,
2014
.
[10]
Jeremy J. Michalek,et al.
Effects of regional temperature on electric vehicle efficiency, range, and emissions in the United States.
,
2015,
Environmental science & technology.
[11]
Randall Guensler,et al.
Daytime Charging: What Is the Hierarchy of Opportunities and Customer Needs? Case Study Based on Atlanta Commute Data
,
2014
.
[12]
Nic Lutsey,et al.
EVALUATION OF STATE-LEVEL U.S. ELECTRIC VEHICLE INCENTIVES
,
2014
.