1 / 27

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Impact Study for the Progress Energy Carolinas Territory

This study analyzes the market model results and impact of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) on Progress Energy Carolinas. It examines the load curves, generation mix, costs, and emissions associated with different charging scenarios. The study concludes that PHEV technology is a viable alternative and recommends active promotion, incentives, and legislation to support its adoption.

jstarnes
Download Presentation

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Impact Study for the Progress Energy Carolinas Territory

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Impact Study for the Progress Energy Carolinas Territory Mike Waters November 2, 2007

  2. Agenda • Utility Background • Market Model Results • Impact on Progress Energy • Load Curves • Generation Mix • Cost • Emissions • Summary

  3. Utility Background

  4. Progress Energy Territory • Fortune 250 Energy Company • Headquarters in Raleigh, NC • Serves 3.1 million customers in FL and NC/SC

  5. Progress Energy Territory • 21,000 MW total generation capacity • 36 sites through the Carolinas, FL, and GA

  6. Market Model Results

  7. Sales percentage of PHEVs achieves ~26% by 2030, resulting in 330k vehicles on the road

  8. Impact on Progress Energy

  9. Three different charging scenarios were evaluated for the incremental load • Investigated three charging scenarios • Uncontrolled • Delayed (after 10 PM) • Off-peak optimization • Assumptions: • Similar to NREL Xcel study • PHEV20: Performance modeled from ADVISOR • Fleet average 5.3 kWh/day providing 40% miles • 120V 20A circuit (charging rate ~ 1.4 kW) • 5% T&D loss

  10. Case 1: Uncontrolled charging results in on-peak demand

  11. Case 2: Delayed charging helps push the demand later into the shoulder peak region

  12. Case 3: Optimized off-peak charging is the most ideal case in terms of cost and timing

  13. As greater control is placed on managing the load timing, the percentage of coal/nuclear increases

  14. Focusing PHEV load off-peak reduces incremental generation costs up to 60%

  15. Wholesale electricity cost in “gasoline equivalent” terms ranges from $0.44 to $1.16 per gallon

  16. Rates are considerably cheaper than gas in all cases, but incremental profit depends on rate scheduling Standard Residential Rate ~ 9 cents/kWh Profit Loss! TOU Rate ~ 4.5 cents/kWh * Based on 670 GWh/329k vehicles

  17. Charging technology must advance between different charging scenarios

  18. Despite increase in coal mix, SO2 and NOx emission rates decrease while CO2 increases slightly off-peak

  19. Net PHEV SO2 emissions are much greater, although cap system will ensure no new emissions overall

  20. Net PHEV NOx emissions are equal to or slightly greater than a standard hybrid Note: NREL/Xcel study assumed no reduction in HEV tailpipe emissions, estimating total HEV rate at 4.6 and providing a more favorable PHEV comparison. This study assumes HEV reduction due to improved mileage.

  21. Net PHEV CO2 emissions are slightly lower than a standard hybrid in all cases

  22. Summary

  23. Result Summary • Incremental load <1% of capacity • No additional capacity required if delayed/off-peak • Effective fuel costs much less than gasoline • Coal use doubles moving towards off-peak • NOx/SOx emissions decrease while CO2 increases moving towards off-peak optimization • Mixed results for vehicle emission comparison • Must take cap system into account • CO2 reduced for all comparisons

  24. Recommendation Summary • PHEV technology is a viable and preferred technology alternative • Engage in active promotion of technology and adoption • Develop internal, cross-functional teams • Develop external network/alliance • Provide customer incentives • Push for legislation • Education (customers and employees) • Tie to reduced carbon technology

  25. Questions?

  26. Appendix

  27. Charging Rates

More Related