Navigant Research Blog

The Dutch Blaze an EV Trail

— November 12, 2014

With the most recent alarming report on climate change from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), governments are once again faced with the question of how to develop policies to address the climate crisis.  The IPCC says that the unrestricted use of fossil fuels must be phased out by 2100.  For some governments, like in the United States, the challenge lies in even getting the public to agree there is a problem.  But even in the European Union (EU), where there is broad consensus on the need for action, it can be challenging to convert this into policies that will successfully drive down greenhouse gas emissions.

One challenge is setting appropriate and achievable targets based on clear-headed analysis, not wishful thinking.  Another challenge is then devising the right mix of carrots and sticks to allow the goal to be met.

The Right Place

The Netherlands’ electromobility initiative is one example of how to develop and implement an environmental policy effectively.  I recently had the chance to talk with a delegation from the Netherlands about the country’s push to promote plug in vehicle (PEV) adoption and its successes to date.  The first and most critical step was recognizing that the country had the right conditions for PEV adoption.  The Netherlands is a small country, densely populated and highly urbanized.   The Dutch tend to be environmentally conscious already, and the country has an extensive and stable grid network (fueled mostly by fossil fuels but with around 15% renewables).  The country also has some of the highest gas prices in Western Europe, thanks in part to the highest fuel tax in the EU.

Given these conditions, the government’s belief that PEVs could find success was well-founded.  The government has set a goal of having 200,000 PEVs in the Netherlands by 2020.  According to Navigant Research’s report, Electric Vehicle Market Forecasts, total light duty vehicle (LDV) parc (i.e., vehicles in use) in the country will be 8.6 million in 2020.  Two hundred thousand PEVs would be 2.3% of the total vehicles on the road.  That may seem small, but it’s actually an aggressive target, requiring PEVs to average more than 5% of annual LDV sales over the next 6 years.   According to Navigant Research’s PEV forecasts, only Norway, Estonia, and the Netherlands have broken 1% annual PEV sales as of 2014.

Tax Relief

The Dutch government offers significant tax incentives for PEV purchases, PEV leasing, and EV charging equipment installation.  The PEV purchase tax rebate amounts to around €7,000 to €10,000 ($8,700-$12,500).  Perhaps more important, however, is the income tax relief on private use of a company car.  A significant number of cars in use in the Netherlands are company cars or cars leased for company use.  PEVs were exempt from the income tax, saving drivers as much as $5,000 annually.

At the same time, the Dutch government provides incentives for EV charging station deployment, for public and workplace use especially.  As of October 2014, there were more than 9.5 million public charging points in the Netherlands.  The effort to roll out infrastructure is supported by Dutch energy and grid companies.

The policies have worked: as of 2014, annual PEV sales in the Netherlands amount to 4% of total LDV sales, and there are a total of more than 32,000 PEVs on Dutch roads.  Moreover, Navigant Research forecasts that the country will actually reach the 200,000 PEV goal by 2019, a year early.

The next phase for the electromobility initiative will see it moving beyond the early PEV adopter phase and promoting further EV charging station workplace and public deployments.  The country’s next target – 1 million PEVs by 2025 – will be a challenge to reach.  But the Dutch have proven that progressive policies can truly shift the vehicle market.

 

Will the Natural Gas Boom Help EVs?

— November 11, 2014

Natural gas is better used to generate electricity to power electric vehicles (EVs) than as a direct transportation fuel, according to a new study by Oak Ridge National Laboratory.  The study, entitled “Well-to-wheel analysis of direct and indirect use of natural gas in passenger vehicles,” rates EVs powered by electricity from natural gas as being more energy efficient, less polluting, and cheaper to fuel than natural gas vehicles.

A contributing factor in the analysis is that natural gas power plants, especially combined cycle power plants, are very efficient in creating electricity, and when that electricity is used for locomotion by an electric motor, the net efficiency is higher than that of a natural gas engine.  The study assesses losses and energy used throughout the system, including leaks during transportation (from pipelines etc.), and during compression and decompression of the gas in the case of compressed natural gas vehicles.  In the case of EVs, the study assesses power losses throughout the distribution grid, electric vehicle charging, and the power transfer to and from the battery.

As seen in the figure below, the study concludes that even a low-efficiency natural gas power plant would provide a more energy efficient source of electricity than using gasoline in a car.  The study used the Nissan LEAF and the natural gas Honda Civic GX as the baseline for the vehicle fuel efficiency.

Wheel to Wheel Energy Use

(Source: Oak Ridge National Laboratory)

Emissions of greenhouse gases, including CO2, are also lower in the case of EVs when either the current mix of generation sources or any type of natural gas power plant are used to create the electricity.  And as is well known, electricity is also cheaper as a transportation fuel: Oak Ridge estimated at time of the study that natural gas costs $1.65 per 25 miles for compressed natural gas vehicles, compared to $1.02 for electricity.

Pipeline Peril

It may seem counter intuitive that an extra step in fuel conversion (i.e., gas to electricity) would still be more efficient, but the greater efficiency of stationary gas turbines relative to small engines (as referenced here by Forbes) explains the math.

However, turning natural gas into electricity for EVs requires sufficient pipeline capacity, and a surge of EVs could overwhelm the regional grid if charging occurs at peak times.  Natural gas also has to compete with other forms of generation on price, and there’s no guarantee that the surplus of natural gas from shale would find its way into EVs, as it may simply replace coal.

The study makes the case for facilities that have combined heat and power to add EVs to the fleet instead of adding the significant cost of a natural gas refueling station.  Conversely, a significant argument for natural gas vehicles is their longer driving range and lower upfront cost.  If an EV’s driving range of 80 to 100 miles doesn’t match with the driving requirements, then the economics or efficiencies won’t matter.

 

Tesla Direct Sales Banned in Another State

— October 28, 2014

In mid-October, Michigan governor Rick Snyder signed legislation that effectively bans Tesla’s direct-to-consumer sales business model in the state.  Direct sales of cars are also currently banned in Texas, Maryland, Virginia, and Arizona, and limitations are in place in Georgia and Colorado.  Despite these setbacks, Tesla has overcome battles in Minnesota, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and recently New Jersey.

The reason Tesla’s sales model has been banned has been explained many times, including past Navigant Research blogs, found here and here.  The most critical factor is that Tesla’s direct model leaves established car dealerships out of the business transaction.  This supposedly gives Tesla an advantage over other automakers (like General Motors, which supports the Tesla bans) that must sell their vehicles through dealerships.

As Tesla sales continue to grow, state laws protecting dealerships will come into sharper focus.  Automakers and dealers will have to adapt to legislative reforms accordingly.  Given that, it’s harder to imagine a future where Tesla is forced to sell through dealers than to envision one in which all automakers are able to set up similar direct-to-consumer sales models as they see fit.  Some automakers are already adding more direct pathways for consumers to communicate directly with the automaker on vehicle specifications and deliveries.

Time to Evolve

Under these changing conditions, automotive retail must adapt to the new, information-based, time-efficient market or become structurally obsolete.  Consumers now have more knowledge, power, and control over their vehicle purchases than ever before, and future car buyers will be far more autonomous.  Greater transparency around vehicle costs, automaker inventories, and financing mechanisms enabled by the Internet shifts the bargaining chips heavily in the consumer’s favor.

The disconnect between established dealers and automakers and the new tech-savvy, well-informed consumers will only become more pronounced if state dealer associations focus on campaigning against Tesla rather than pushing industry adaptation.

 

Partnering Takes the Pain Out of Paying for EV Charging

— October 27, 2014

At the dawn of the modern electric vehicle (EV) era (way back in 2010), EV industry participants recognized that a simple way to pay for vehicle charging was critical to EV adoption.  In fact, I recall having conversations with at least one international payment processing company back then regarding the need for a central clearinghouse for EV charging payments.  I described this segment as a small niche that would grow into a major opportunity over time.  Neither that company nor others chose to start building the necessary relationships.  But today, after years of considerable talk and little action, progress is finally being made as charging networks are collaboration and payment clearinghouses are starting to emerge.

During the past half-decade there have been numerous tales of the frustrations of EV drivers who carry multiple cards to be able to access competing proprietary networks.  The Hubject consortium in Europe has been leading the charge to make charging more consistent by simplifying customer authorization, and the group recently announced a method that enables mobile phones to pay for EV charging.

The PayPal Factor

The intercharge direct system is powered by online payment system PayPal.  Drivers scan a QR code on the charging station with their phone, which connects to the intercharge website where PayPal and other payment options are offered.  Customers who have a contract with an EV services provider can pay their existing rates, and more importantly, EV drivers without a contract can still access any of the 3,000 charging stations that support intercharge.

Things have come full circle for PayPal, which was founded by EV maker Tesla Motor’s founder, Elon Musk.  (Note the irony that, since Tesla offers free charging at its charging website, PayPal largely won’t come into play for its customers.)  PayPal is an effective backend payment system, since it’s used globally for small payment amounts.  PayPal is currently being used in the United States for EV charging payments by General Electrics’s WattStation, and in October ChargePoint announced that it would begin accepting PayPal as well.

Reducing the cost and hassle of roaming between EV charging networks will increase the use of public charging stations, which will result in more charging stations being made available, and in turn higher levels of EV adoption.

Makers Make Progress

Efforts to expand EV charging in the United States are slowly paying off, thanks in part to the work of the EV manufacturers themselves.  Nissan is offering free public charging to buyers of the LEAF and convinced competitors ChargePoint, Car Charging Group, AeroVironment, and NRG to each support its EZ-Charge card.  BMW’s ChargeNow program offers a single card for paying at stations from ChargePoint and NRG’s eVgo network, as well as other partners internationally.

Not all partnerships in the area have worked out; ChargePoint launched an ill-fated joint venture with ECOtality in 2013 called Collaboratev that would have streamlined payment processes across both networks, had ECOtality not gone bankrupt only a few months later.

While proprietary payment systems make business sense for the charging networks, they hurt more than help EV owners and automakers.  If the expected millions of EVs are to rely on public charging, roaming between networks should be as simple as roaming between mobile phone networks or getting money from any ATM.  These recent developments provide hope that such interconnections are starting to emerge.

 

Blog Articles

Most Recent

By Date

Tags

Clean Transportation, Electric Vehicles, Policy & Regulation, Renewable Energy, Smart Energy Practice, Smart Energy Program, Smart Grid Practice, Smart Transportation Practice, Smart Transportation Program, Utility Innovations

By Author


{"userID":"","pageName":"Clean Transportation","path":"\/tag\/clean-transportation","date":"11\/24\/2014"}