As the Dutch electric vehicle (EV) fleet continues to expand, so will the amount of charging sessions increase. This expanding demand for energy will add on to the already existing strain on the grid, primarily during peak hours on workdays in the early morning and evening. This growing energy demand requires new methods to handle the charging of EVs, to distribute the available energy in the most effective way. Therefore, a large number of ‘smart charging’ initiatives have recently been developed, whereby the charging session of the EV is based on the conditions of the energy grid. However, the term smart charging is used for a variety of smart charging initiatives, often involving different optimization strategies and charging processes. For most practitioners, as well as academics, it is hard to distinguish the large range of smart charging initiatives initiated in recent years, how they differentiate from each other and how they contribute to a smarter charging infrastructure. This paper has the objective to provide an overview of smart charging initiatives in the Netherlands and develop a categorization of smart charging initiatives regarding objectives, proposed measures and intended contributions. We will do so by looking at initiatives that focus on smart charging at a household level, investigating the smart charging possibilities for EV owners who either make use of a private or (semi-)public charging point. The different smart charging initiatives will be analyzed and explicated in combination with a literature study, focusing on the different optimization strategies and requirements to smart charge an electric vehicle.
DOCUMENT
Residential public charging points are shared by multiple electric vehicle drivers, often neighbours. Therefore, charging behaviour is embedded in a social context. Behaviours that affect, or are influenced by, other publiccharging point users have been sparsely studied and lack an overarching and comprehensive definition. Consequently, very few measures are applied in practice to influence charging behaviour. We aim to classify and define the social dimension of charging behaviour from a social-psychological perspective and, using a behaviour change framework, identify and analyse the measures to influence this behaviour. We interviewed 15 experts onresidential public charging infrastructure in the Netherlands. We identified 17 charging behaviours rooted in interpersonal interactions between individuals and interactions between individuals and technology. These behaviours can be categorised into prosocial and antisocial charging behaviours. Prosocial charging behaviour provides or enhances the opportunity for other users to charge their vehicle at the public charging point, for instance by charging only when necessary. Antisocial charging behaviour prevents or diminishes this opportunity, for instance by occupying the charging point after charging, intentionally or unintentionally. We thenidentified 23 measures to influence antisocial and prosocial charging behaviours. These measures can influence behaviour through human–technology interaction, such as providing charging etiquettes to new electric vehicle drivers or charging idle fees, and interpersonal interaction, such as social pressure from other charging point users or facilitating social interactions to exchange requests. Our approach advocates for more attention to the social dimension of charging behaviour.
DOCUMENT
At request of the MRA-E, G4 and ElaadNL HvA is researching the potential of Smart Charging. In this blog Youssef el Bouhassani pinpoints this potential.
LINK
Electric vehicles have penetrated the Dutch market, which increases the potential for decreased local emissions, the use and storage of sustainable energy, and the roll-out and use of electric car-sharing business models. This development also raises new potential issues such as increased electricity demand, a lack of social acceptance, and infrastructural challenges in the built environment. Relevant stakeholders, such as policymakers and service providers, need to align their values and prioritize these aspects. Our study investigates the prioritization of 11 Dutch decision-makers in the field of public electric vehicle charging. These decision-makers prioritized different indicators related to measurements (e.g., EV adoption rates or charge point profitability), organization (such as fast- or smart-charging), and developments (e.g., the development of mobility-service markets) using the best-worst method. The indicators within these categories were prioritized for three different scenario's in time. The results reveal that priorities will shift from EV adoption and roll-out of infrastructure to managing peak demand, using more sustainable charging techniques (such as V2G), and using sustainable energy towards 2030. Technological advancements and autonomous charging techniques will become more relevant in a later time period, around 2040. Environmental indicators (e.g., local emissions) were consistently valued low, whereas mobility indicators were valued differently across participants, indicating a lack of consensus. Smart charging was consistently valued higher than other charging techniques, independent of time period. The results also revealed that there are some distinct differences between the priorities of policymakers and service providers. Having a systematic overview of what aspects matter supports the policy discussion around EVs in the built environment.
DOCUMENT
This paper investigates smart charging strategies for battery-electric construction machinery (non-road mobile machinery, NRMM) through a case study of a large-scale housing project in The Hague, Netherlands. The study develops a methodology to estimate energy demands and simulate charging profiles during various construction phases. Using a combination of smart charging and temporary battery storage, the paper demonstrates that peak grid loads can be significantly reduced—by up to 46%—compared to conventional charging strategies. Simulations reveal that grid limitations, especially during early construction phases, can be overcome with optimized load management and supplemental battery systems. The findings highlight the importance of smart charging infrastructure and energy planning in enabling the transition to zero-emission construction practices. This research contributes to the practical implementation of electric NRMM in urban construction projects, addressing one of the key bottlenecks in decarbonizing the construction sector.
DOCUMENT
This toolkit, originating from the research group Psychology for Sustainable Cities, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS), contains materials that help to promote behavioural change in relation to electric shared transport based in onstreet e-Mobility hubs (eHUBs). Behavioural knowledge is an essential ingredient for the successful implementation of eHUBs. Because behaviour is very dependent on the target group’s capabilities and motivation and on the social and physical context in which behaviour takes place, the research group has developed materials that municipalities can use to design a tailor-made eHUBs promotion intervention that suits their own situation. Therefore, practical examples and insights from earlier research are shared with regard to stimulating the use of eHUBs.
DOCUMENT
SEEV4-City is an innovation project funded by the European Union Interreg North Sea Region Programme. Its main objective is to demonstrate smart electric mobility and integration of renewable energy solutions and share the learnings gained. The project reports on the results of six Operational Pilots (OPs) which have different scales and are located in five different cities in four different countries in the North Sea Region.Loughborough OP (United Kingdom) is the smallest pilot, being a household with a bi-directional EV charging unit for the Nissan Leaf, a stationary battery, and a PV system. In the Kortrijk OP (Belgium), a battery system and a bi-directional charging unit for the delivery van (as well as a smart charging station for ebikes) were added to the energy system. In Leicester (United Kingdom), five unidirectional charging units were to be accompanied by four bi-directional charging units. The Johan Cruyff Arena OP is a larger pilot in Amsterdam, with a 2.8 MWh (partly) second life stationary battery storage for Frequency Control Regulation services and back-up power, 14 fast chargers and one bi-directional charger. Integrated into the existing energy system is a 1 MW PV system that is already installed on the roof. In the Oslo OP, 102 chargers were installed, of which two are fast chargers. A stationary battery energy storage system (BESS) supports the charging infrastructure and is used for peak shaving. The FlexPower OP in Amsterdam is the largest OP with over 900 EV charging outlets across the city, providing smart charging capable of reducing the energy peak demand in the evening.Before the start of the project, three Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were determined:A. Estimated CO2 reductionB. Estimated increase in energy autonomyC. Estimated Savings from Grid Investment Deferral
DOCUMENT
Contribution to conference magazine https://husite.nl/ssc2017/ Conference ‘Smart Sustainable Cities 2017 – Viable Solutions’ The conference ‘Smart Sustainable Cities 2017 – Viable Solutions’ was held on 14 June 2017 in Utrecht, the Netherlands. Over 250 participants from all over Europe attended the conference.
DOCUMENT
Mobility hubs facilitate multimodal transport and have the potential to improve the accessibility and usability of new mobility services. However, in the context of increasing digitalisation, using mobility hubs requires digital literacy or even owning a smartphone. This constraint may result in the exclusion of current and potential users. Digital kiosks might prove to be a solution, as they can facilitate the use of the services found at mobility hubs. Nevertheless, knowledge of how digital kiosks may improve the experience of disadvantaged groups remains limited in the literature. As part of the SmartHubs project, a field test with a digital kiosk was conducted with 105 participants in Brussels (Belgium) and Rotterdam (The Netherlands) to investigate the intention to use it and its usability in the context of mobility hubs. This study adopted a mixed methods approach, combining participant observation and questionnaire surveys. Firstly, participants were asked to accomplish seven tasks with the digital kiosk while being observed by the researchers. Finally, assisted questionnaire surveys were conducted with the same participants, including close-ended, open-ended and socio-demographic questions. The results offer insights into the experience of the users of a digital kiosk in a mobility hub and the differences across specific social groups. These findings may be relevant for decision-makers and practitioners working in urban mobility on subjects such as mobility hubs and shared mobility, and for user interface developers concerned with the inclusivity of digital kiosks.
LINK
