IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v374y2024ics0306261924013783.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimizing electric vehicle fleet integration in industrial demand response: Maximizing vehicle-to-grid benefits while compensating vehicle owners for battery degradation

Author

Listed:
  • Leippi, Andre
  • Fleschutz, Markus
  • Davis, Kevin
  • Klingler, Anna-Lena
  • Murphy, Michael D.

Abstract

This paper addresses the integration of electric vehicle (EV) fleets into industrial smart grids to increase operational flexibility. It focuses on an extended multi-objective optimization problem that minimizes two primary objectives: (i) the electricity expenditure of a company using its employees’ EV batteries as temporary distributed energy storage, and (ii) the costs associated with the degradation of EV batteries, given the additional usage from the company’s perspective. In this paper, the utilization of an EV fleet is simulated at the individual car level over a one-year period. These optimization problems were balanced by using real-time electricity prices and the effective demand response (DR) of the company’s electrical load. The company utilized the EVs as battery storage to offset fluctuating electricity prices, while compensating EV owners with free electricity for the costs incurred through degradation of their batteries. The extent to which the company could compensate EV owners while maintaining the viability of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) services in a non-residential scenario was explored. The results established an equilibrium point at which the financial benefits for the company resulting from V2G services was maximized against the negative financial impact of increased battery degradation for EV owners. The results showed that there is a potential mutual benefit between the company and EV owners, even if the company provided EV owners with free charging (based on a percentage of their battery capacity) for each day of their attendance. This mutually beneficial zone ranged from 3%–10% of the battery capacity for AC charging and 6%–17% for DC charging. Optimal Pareto values indicated an economic trade-off that benefited both stakeholders, with DC charging proving significantly more profitable for the company than AC charging (between 257.5% to 38.1% depending on the amount of free charging provided). The findings emphasize the need for an equitable pricing mechanism considering the different characteristics of EVs based on the operational and financial benefits for both parties to create a balanced pricing framework for V2G.

Suggested Citation

  • Leippi, Andre & Fleschutz, Markus & Davis, Kevin & Klingler, Anna-Lena & Murphy, Michael D., 2024. "Optimizing electric vehicle fleet integration in industrial demand response: Maximizing vehicle-to-grid benefits while compensating vehicle owners for battery degradation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 374(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:374:y:2024:i:c:s0306261924013783
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.123995
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261924013783
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.123995?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Salvatore Micari & Giuseppe Napoli, 2024. "Electric Vehicles for a Flexible Energy System: Challenges and Opportunities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-26, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:374:y:2024:i:c:s0306261924013783. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.