A comparison of electric vehicle Level 1 and Level 2 charging efficiency

Sears, Justine; Roberts, David; Glitman, Karen

doi:10.1109/sustech.2014.7046253

Cited by 66 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whilst there are a number of different charging modes, there are also numerous EV connectors both standardised and manufacturer proprietary versions, such as Tesla's version [31] It is important to note that these conductive charging systems do have associated energy losses, Sears, Roberts & Glitman [32] identified that average charge efficiency was 85.7% when considering off peak, smart charging and different forms of charging equipment and modes. This is further reinforced by work undertaken by Forward, Glitman & Roberts [4], there study found an average efficiency of 86.4% and Valøen & Shoesmith [33] who identify that between 10-20% of energy is lost in charging and discharging an EV traction battery.…”

Section: Mode 4 (Dc)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential of wireless power transfer for dynamic charging of electric vehicles

Hutchinson

Waterson

Anvari

et al. 2018

IET Intelligent Transport Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) offers a viable means of charging Electric Vehicles (EV)'s whilst in a dynamic state (DWPT), mitigating issues concerning vehicle range, the size of on-board energy storage and the network distribution of static based charging systems. Such Charge While Driving (CWD) technology has the capability to accelerate EV market penetration through increasing user convenience, reducing EV costs and increasing driving range indefinitely, dependent upon sufficient charging infrastructure. This paper reviews current traction battery technologies, conductive and inductive charging processes, influential parameters specific to the dynamic charging state as well as highlighting notable work undertaken within the field of WPT charging systems. DWPT system requirements, specific to the driver, vehicle and infrastructure interaction environment are summarised and international standards highlighted in order to acknowledge the work that must be done within this area. It is important to recognise that the gap is not currently technological; instead, it is an implementation issue. Without the necessary standardisation, system architectures cannot be developed and implemented without fear of interoperability issues between countries or indeed systems. For successful deployment, the technologies impact should be maximised with the minimum quantity of infrastructure and technology use, deployment scenarios and locations are discussed that have the potential to bring this to fruition. IntroductionThe electrification of road transport provides a viable means of reducing fossil fuel consumption and environmental pollution, hence the recent advancements in Electric Vehicle (EV) design and performance [1]. However, the high costs and poor specific energy densities of batteries compared to fossil fuels results in a less than ideal scenario [2]. Due to their relatively shorter range, EV's require more frequent charging (than refuelling of Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles) to maintain a desirable range and with long charge times (compared with conventional refuelling times) or potential battery degradation that occurs during rapid charging; battery charging technology has restricted EV development. With no significant advancements in battery technology that would bring EV range in line with comparable ICE vehicles forecasted within the foreseeable future [3] this has resulted in substantial research into alternative charging methods. Whilst conventional plug in charging is the most common form, there are still conductive energy losses within the system resulting in an overall efficiency of around 86% [4] and potentially lower for rapid chargers. In addition, the high power transfer, human handling and the ability for the user to forget to plug in/out result in a pragmatic scenario.Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology is capable of mitigating the issues of plug in charging; the EV is parked over a coil that inductively transfers electrical energy to a receiver coil positioned on the vehicle. ...

show abstract

Section: Mode 4 (Dc)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential of wireless power transfer for dynamic charging of electric vehicles

Hutchinson

Waterson

Anvari

et al. 2018

IET Intelligent Transport Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An efficiency of 90% was used for the simulation, as this level has been observed in situations similar to at home charging [16]. …”

Section: B Electricity Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal Design and Operation of a Low Carbon Community Based Multi-Energy Systems Considering EV Integration

Cao

Crozier

McCulloch

et al. 2019

IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Hybridization of electricity, heat power and transportation energy combines the advantages of multi-energy sources. This paper proposes the combined use of fuel cell, combined heat and power units (CHP), hot water tank storage, gas boiler and photovoltaic (PV) generators to meet the electrical, thermal and transportation electrification energy demands in an eco-friendly multi-energy microgrid. An optimal energy balance methodology is proposed in this paper for sizing the capacity of fuel cell, CHP, gas boiler and PV. The method is to minimise the total annual cost and emissions of the whole system, based on hourly electrical and thermal load profile. The methodology can be used as a planning tool for multi-energy systems.

show abstract

“…Due to the lack of dynamometer data for the Tesla Model S, its powertrain efficiencies are assumed to equal the Nissan Leaf for analysis in the V2G case. The charger efficiency for all three EV chargers is estimated to be 89.4% [24]. To apply these established EVs to charging scenarios, hourly CO 2 emissions rates are also necessary.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%