1 Charging Ahead Power Grid Perspectives on Plug-in Electric Vehicles.

1

Charging AheadCharging AheadPower Grid Perspectives on Plug-in Electric Power Grid Perspectives on Plug-in Electric

VehiclesVehicles

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

ERCOT 42,769

SPP 30,459 Midwest ISO 94,644

PJM 144,172

NYISO 43,738

ISO-NE 61,074CAISO

267,654

Of the 1,000,000 PEVsexpected over the next

10 years, more than684,000 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!

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

United States Annual Prius New Registrations

United StatesNotes:• 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 NewRank State Registrations

1 CA 123,9892 FL 20,5963 TX 18,2974 NY 18,0335 VA 17,8286 WA 16,4597 PA 14,7918 IL 14,6609 MA 13,723

10 MD 12,040

States With Highest Prius Sales

PopulationRank State (Millions)

1 CA 36.82 TX 24.33 NY 19.54 FL 18.35 IL 12.96 PA 12.57 OH 11.58 MI 10.09 GA 9.7

10 NC 9.2

States With Highest Population, 2000-2007

What have we learned about early Prius consumers?

Prius Registrations – New Registrations Per Capita, 2000-2007*

Ranking by statePer 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 % ofRank Metro Area Registrations US

1 New York 18,622 3.7%2 Los Angeles 52,700 10.4%3 Chicago 9,400 1.9%4 Wash., DC 15,100 8.4%5 San Francisco 42,900 8.4%6 Philadelphia 6,300 1.2%7 Boston 13,200 2.6%8 Detroit 3,000 0.6%9 Dallas 3,200 0.6%

10 Houston 3,900 0.8%

Metro Areas Where Prius Was Most Popular

Registrations perRank State 1000 Residents

1 CA 3.372 VT 3.213 OR 3.044 NH 2.545 WA 2.516 DC 2.467 VA 2.298 MD 2.149 MA 2.11

10 ME 2.03

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 size3. 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

City Population City Population

New York 16,400,000 Atlanta 4,100,000

Los Angeles 16,400,000 Miami 3,900,000

Chicago 9,200,000 Seattle-Tacoma 3,600,000

Washington, DC 7,600,000 Phoenix 3,300,000

San Francisco 7,000,000 Minneapolis 3,000,000

Philadelphia 6,200,000 Cleveland-Akron 3,000,000

Boston 5,800,000 San Diego 2,850,000

Detroit-Ann Arbor 5,500,000 St. Louis 2,600,000

Dallas-Fort Worth 5,200,000 Denver-Boulder 2,600,000

Houston 4,700,000 Tampa-St. Pete 2,400,000

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

City Consumer PEVs Fleet PEVs Total PEVs

New York 40,000 14,069 54,069

Los Angeles 105,000 14,069 119,069

Chicago 20,000 7,892 27,892

Washington, DC 31,000 6,520 37,520

San Francisco 85,000 6,005 91,005

Philadelphia 13,000 5,319 18,319

Boston 27,000 4,976 31,976

Detroit-Ann Arbor 6,000 4,718 10,718

Dallas-Fort Worth 6,500 4,461 10,961

Houston 8,000 4,032 12,032

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

City Consumer PEVs Fleet PEVs Total PEVs

Atlanta 4,500 3,517 8,017

Miami 8,000 3,346 11,346

Seattle-Tacoma 23,000 3,088 26,088

Phoenix 13,000 2,831 15,831

Minneapolis 8,000 2,574 10,574

Cleveland-Akron 6,000 2,574 8,574

San Diego 20,000 2,445 22,445

St. Louis 3,500 2,230 5,730

Denver-Boulder 9,000 2,230 11,230

Tampa-St. Pete 7,000 2,059 9,059

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 Area Total 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 York 54,069 448 40 26

Los Angeles 119,069 988 174 116

Chicago 27,892 231 41 27

Washington, DC 37,520 311 55 37

San Francisco 91,005 755 133 89

Philadelphia 18,319 152 27 18

Boston 31,976 265 47 31

Detroit-Ann Arbor 10,718 89 16 10

Dallas-Fort Worth 10,961 91 16 11

Houston 12,032 100 18 12

MW Load and Charging Projections

Slide 2 of 2 City Metro Area Total 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

Atlanta 8,017 67 12 8

Miami 11,346 94 17 11

Seattle-Tacoma 26,088 216 38 25

Phoenix 15,831 131 23 15

Minneapolis 10,574 88 15 10

Cleveland-Akron 8,574 71 13 8

San Diego 22,445 186 33 22

St. Louis 5,730 48 8 6

Denver-Boulder 11,230 93 16 11

Tampa-St. Pete 9,059 75 13 9

22

Projected PEV Load

ISO/RTO Total PEVsLoad 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-NE 61,074 338 75 50

NYISO 43,738 242 27 18

PJM 144,172 797 178 119

Midwest ISO 94,644 523 117 78

SPP 30,459 168 38 25

ERCOT 42,769 237 53 35

CAISO 267,654 1,480 331 221

TOTAL 684,510 3,785 819 546

23

Impact of Charging Patterns

3,785

819546

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

Meg

awat

ts

Load if everyonecharged at the

same time

Load if charging isstaged over 8 hours

Load if charging isstaged over 12

hours

PEV Load Impact - U.S. ISO & RTO Regions

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.

27

ISO – New England

28

New York ISO

29

PJM Interconnection

30

Midwest ISO

31

Southwest Power Pool

32

Electric Reliability Council of Texas

33

California ISO