NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy

Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

Technical Report

NREL/TP-5400-73600 

May 2019 

Surat Municipal Corporation Bus 

Electrification Assessment

Cabell Hodge,

1 Matthew Jeffers,1 Jal Desai,1 Eric Miller,1

and Varsha Shah2

1 National Renewable Energy Laboratory

2 Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy

Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

Technical Report

NREL/TP-5400-73600 

May 2019 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

15013 Denver West Parkway

Golden, CO 80401

303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov

Surat Municipal Corporation Bus 

Electrification Assessment

Cabell Hodge,

1 Matthew Jeffers,1 Jal Desai,1 Eric Miller,1

and Varsha Shah2

1 National Renewable Energy Laboratory

2 Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology

Suggested Citation 

Hodge, Cabell, Matthew Jeffers, Jal Desai, Eric Miller, and Varsha Shah. 2019. Surat 

Municipal Corporation Bus Electrification Assessment. Golden, CO: National Renewable 

Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-5400-73600. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/73600.pdf.
NOTICE

This work was authored in part by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable 

Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding 

provided by U.S. Department of Energy Office of International Affairs. The views expressed herein do not 

necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the U.S. Government.

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable 

Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reports produced after 1991 

and a growing number of pre-1991 documents are available 

free via www.OSTI.gov.

Cover Photos by Dennis Schroeder: (clockwise, left to right) NREL 51934, NREL 45897, NREL 42160, NREL 45891, NREL 48097, 

NREL 46526.

NREL prints on paper that contains recycled content.
iii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Acknowledgments 

The authors would like to thank Dr. D. N. Basak and Mustafa Sonasath of the Surat Municipal 

Corporation for welcoming them to Surat, providing the information necessary to complete this 

report, and taking the initiative to consider electrification of their buses. Partha Mishra with the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) deserves special thanks for his analysis 

of battery lifecycles. In addition, the authors would like to thank Andrew Kotz, Leslie Eudy, 

Margo Melendez, and Mollie Putzig at NREL for their contributions and input to the report. 

They would also like to thank Shimin Sudhakar and Atlul Vijay Deva with the Sardar 

Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology for assisting with data collection. The work would 

not have been possible without the leadership from Russel Conklin and Rudy Kahsar with the 

U.S. Department of Energy. Finally, the authors would like to thank Anya Breitenbach for her 

diligence, responsiveness, and attention to detail while editing this report.
iv

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

List of Acronyms

AC alternating current

APFC automatic power factor control

BEB battery electric bus

BLAST Battery Lifetime Analysis and Simulation Tool

BRTS bus rapid transit system

BYD Build Your Dreams

C Celsius

capex capital expense

DCFC direct current fast chargers

dLe diesel liter equivalent

DGVCL Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Limited

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

DRIVE Drive-cycle Rapid Investigation, Visualization, and Evaluation

ESS energy storage system

EVSE electric vehicle supply equipment

FAME Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles

FASTSim Future Automotive System Technology Simulator

GCC gross cost contract 

GPS Global positioning system

GVWR gross vehicle weight rating 

HT high-tension

Hz hertz

kg kilogram

km kilometer

kph kilometers per hour

kW kilowatt

kWh kilowatt-hour

INR Indian Rupees

L liter

LFP lithium iron phosphate

LT low-tension

m million

M million

NCA lithium nickel cadmium aluminum

NMC lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

OEM original equipment manufacturer

opex operating expense

SMC Surat Municipal Corporation

SOC state of charge

SVNIT Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology

U.S. United States

USD U.S. dollars

VCB vacuum circuit breaker 
v

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Executive Summary

This report examines the potential for Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) to electrify its bus 

rapid transit system (BRTS) in Surat, India. Researchers from the National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory (NREL) partnered with the Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology

(SVNIT) to collect data from SMC, log in-use GPS data of SMC buses, and analyze the results. 

The ensuing analysis focuses on the operational feasibility and life-cycle costs of battery electric 

buses (BEBs) compared to diesel buses operated on eight BRTS routes out of four bus depots 

(Figure ES-1).

Figure ES-1. Map of logged BRTS routes and depot locations

NREL used a backward-looking model to calculate power requirements for a BEB based on 

vehicle speed profiles for the BRTS routes. The model uses actual vehicle operation to solve for 

the power requirements of the BEB, accounting for regenerative braking, as shown in equation 

ES-1 and more fully described in section 3.3.1. Estimated battery power was used to calculate 

the required battery size.

Battery  Motor  Transmission  Differential  Wheel  Chassis  Logged Data (ES-1)

Modeled power requirements for each of these routes varied due to distance, time, route 

conditions, and driving behavior. In addition, weight of the bus including passenger load and 

ambient temperature (assuming that each bus used air conditioning) were significant factors
vi

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

contributing to the BEB efficiency. Table ES-1 shows the average calculated BEB efficiency for 

a range of vehicle mass and ambient temperatures, as simulated on the Surat BRTS routes. The 

ambient temperatures used in the model are representative of the range of operating temperatures 

experienced in Surat, and the range of modeled vehicle mass (7,000 kg to 18,000 kg) covers the 

estimated vehicle mass for the BEBs with publicly available gross vehicle weight ratings in 

India.

Table ES-1. BEB Efficiency by Temperature and Mass (kWh/km)

Mass (kg) Temperature (°C)

25 28 30 35 40

7,000 0.56 0.61 0.64 0.72 0.80

8,000 0.60 0.65 0.68 0.76 0.84

9,000 0.64 0.69 0.72 0.80 0.89

10,000 0.69 0.74 0.77 0.85 0.93

11,000 0.74 0.79 0.82 0.90 0.98

12,000 0.79 0.84 0.88 0.96 1.04

13,000 0.85 0.90 0.94 1.02 1.10

14,000 0.92 0.97 1.00 1.08 1.17

15,000 0.99 1.04 1.07 1.15 1.24

16,000 1.07 1.12 1.15 1.23 1.32

17,000 1.15 1.20 1.23 1.31 1.40

18,000 1.23 1.28 1.32 1.40 1.48

NREL modeled the power requirements for each route using a range of assumptions on vehicle 

efficiency, and then estimated the minimum energy storage system (ESS) capacity required to 

meet the daily service requirements of each BRTS route. 

Figure ES-2 provides an estimated range of ESS sizes per cumulative fraction of BRTS service

met by BEBs. Hashmarks indicate each BRTS route. The bold blue line represents an efficiency 

of 1.08 kW/km, which correlates to 14,000 kg and 35°C in Table ES-1. For this modeled average 

efficiency, conventional BRTS buses could begin to be replaced by depot-charge BEBs with 

250–300 kWh battery capacity.
vii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure ES-2. Cumulative fraction of BRTS bus fleet vs ESS capacity

When calculating the necessary ESS capacity for BEBs, SMC should consider that traction

batteries will degrade over time. Manufacturer warranties often specify 80% or 85% of original 

capacity as the level at which batteries should be replaced, suggesting fleet owners should 

purchase vehicles with an initial ESS capacity of 17% to 25% over the required energy 

consumption. SMC should also consider that stated ESS capacity is sometimes larger than usable 

capacity.

NREL modeled battery degradation for three different battery chemistries with the Battery 

Lifetime Analysis and Simulation Tool (BLAST). Using the power requirement calculations 

described above, the team simulated a 500-kWh battery that was fully charged to 100% of actual 

capacity an hour before the start of daily operation. Leaving a lithium-ion battery at 100% state 

of charge (SOC) is not optimal for battery longevity. Some manufacturers limit the maximum 

and minimum SOC for their batteries in order to improve battery longevity, and operators can 

extend lifespan by keeping SOC as close to 50% as possible. NREL recommends securing an 

acceptable battery warranty as well.

The Government of India Department of Heavy Industries (DHI) has financial incentives 

available for BEBs and charging infrastructure. The Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of 

Hybrid and Electric Vehicles (FAME) II program provides a purchase incentive for BEBs of 

₹20,000/kWh1 of battery capacity or 40% of the bus value, whichever is lower. In addition, DHI 

has proposed to cover the entire project cost of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) for one 

 

1 The majority of the monetary values in this report are written in Indian rupees (denoted as ₹ or INR) or 

derivations as noted (e.g. million INR). NREL used 71.029 INR to 1 U.S. dollar (USD) as the conversion rate in 

this report based on Indian Rupee, the Economy Forecast Agency (http://dollarrupee.in/), January 17, 2019. 
viii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

slow charger per bus or one fast charger per every ten buses. This incentive structure is 

significantly different from FAME I, but the combined impact to BEBs and EVSE costs is 

similar under both programs.

To complete a life-cycle cost comparison, NREL applied several assumptions, including that 

BEBs could replace diesel buses at a one-to-one ratio. While this would be accurate in some 

cases, longer routes or less favorable conditions could require a greater ratio of BEBs to diesel 

buses. NREL used published purchase cost data for four BEBs and two diesel buses available in 

India. SMC provided a diesel fuel price of ₹74.3/liter, and NREL calculated the cost of 

electricity using DGVCL rates assuming overnight charging at the depots to take advantage of 

time-of-use pricing rebates. Maintenance costs were based on three published reports comparing 

electric and diesel buses operating within U.S. transit agencies using adjusted labor rates to 

account for relative differences between the United States and India. The economic analysis did 

not account for on-route charging or swappable batteries due to insufficient information.

Based on these calculations, three of the four BEBs identified were less expensive than the two

reference diesel buses over seven years of ownership (Figure ES-3). However, the BEB with the 

largest ESS—which will likely be necessary for Surat BRTS routes—may be slightly more 

expensive in the seven-year period when compared to the most affordable diesel bus. If 

maintenance costs for Surat BEBs are more similar to the U.S. BEBs under warranty, then even 

the 324 kWh bus may be less expensive than the most affordable diesel bus considered.

Figure ES-3. Total cost of ownership comparison

NREL recommends subsequent analysis to verify the operational results model with a pilot 

deployment of BEBs. SMC could validate the power requirements for various routes at various

ambient temperatures, precipitation conditions, and passenger loads in order to determine how 

many routes could be electrified without impacting BRTS service. The economic analysis will 

take longer to verify—particularly maintenance costs, which can vary significantly from year to 

year with small-scale vehicle deployments. However, this report indicates that several Surat 

BRTS routes could be electrified using BEBs currently available in India, and SMC could 

benefit from significantly reduced operational costs.
ix

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................... v

1 Introduction and Background ............................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Partner Organizations.................................................................................................................... 1

1.1.1 NREL ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1.2 SVNIT.............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1.3 SMC ................................................................................................................................. 2

1.2 Surat, India .................................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Surat Transit System ..................................................................................................................... 4

1.3.1 Transit Business Model.................................................................................................... 4

1.3.2 BRTS Background ........................................................................................................... 5

1.3.3 Surat Transit System Operations...................................................................................... 5

1.4 Smart Cities................................................................................................................................... 8

2 Battery Electric Bus Market............................................................................................................... 10

2.1 Policies and Incentives................................................................................................................ 11

3 Approach............................................................................................................................................. 13

3.1 Data Collection............................................................................................................................ 13

3.2 BRTS Route Characterization..................................................................................................... 14

3.3 ESS Model Description............................................................................................................... 15

3.3.1 Model Description.......................................................................................................... 15

4 Operational Assessment Results ..................................................................................................... 18

4.1 BRTS Route Profiles and Statistics............................................................................................. 18

4.2 BEB Modeling Results................................................................................................................ 23

5 Battery Life Longevity........................................................................................................................ 32

6 Life-cycle Cost Comparison.............................................................................................................. 36

6.1 Capital Expense........................................................................................................................... 36

6.1.1 Bus Costs........................................................................................................................ 36

6.1.2 EVSE Costs and Considerations.................................................................................... 39

6.2 Operational Costs........................................................................................................................ 42

6.2.1 Fuel Costs....................................................................................................................... 42

6.2.2 Maintenance Costs ......................................................................................................... 43

6.2.3 Life-cycle Operating Costs............................................................................................. 44

6.3 Total Cost of Ownership ............................................................................................................. 45

7 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 47
x

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

List of Figures

Figure ES-1. Map of logged BRTS routes and depot locations.................................................................... v

Figure ES-2. Cumulative fraction of BRTS bus fleet vs ESS capacity....................................................... vii

Figure ES-3. Total cost of ownership comparison.....................................................................................viii

Figure 1. Location of Surat, India................................................................................................................. 3

Figure 2. BRTS bus in Surat......................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 3. Map of Surat transit system........................................................................................................... 6

Figure 4. Average diesel fuel economy by daily driving distance for all routes........................................... 8

Figure 5. SMC Smart City Centre................................................................................................................. 9

Figure 6. Trip Recorder 747 ProS............................................................................................................... 13

Figure 7. Motor efficiency map .................................................................................................................. 16

Figure 8: Comparison of modeled results to measured results................................................................... 17

Figure 9. Map of logged BRTS routes and depot locations........................................................................ 18

Figure 10. Example daily drive cycle - Route 11 ....................................................................................... 19

Figure 11. Kinetic intensity vs driving average speed for BRTS routes..................................................... 22

Figure 12. Characteristic acceleration vs aerodynamic speed for BRTS routes......................................... 22

Figure 13. Example speed profile for a measured conventional bus and the modeled electric bus............ 23

Figure 14. Instantaneous power requirement and cumulative energy use .................................................. 24

Figure 15. Sankey diagram displaying the dissipation of battery energy for a BEB on Route 11, 

normalized by route distance ................................................................................................. 25

Figure 16. Sankey diagram displaying the dissipation of fuel energy for a conventional bus on Route 11, 

normalized by route distance ................................................................................................. 25

Figure 17. Fuel economy by BRTS route for baseline diesel buses (measured in-use data) and BEBs 

(modeled results).................................................................................................................... 26

Figure 18. Impact of ambient temperature on BEB energy consumption rate............................................ 27

Figure 19. Impact of vehicle mass on BEB energy consumption rate ........................................................ 29

Figure 20. Cumulative fraction of BRTS bus fleet vs ESS capacity........................................................... 31

Figure 21. ESS charge and discharge profile for model ............................................................................. 33

Figure 22. Ambient temperature profiles for model ................................................................................... 33

Figure 23. Quoted rates for electric buses - gross cost contract (GCC)...................................................... 37

Figure 24. Quoted rates for electric buses - outright purchase ................................................................... 38

Figure 25. EVSE connection types............................................................................................................. 39

(a) handheld conductive (b) automatic conductive (c) automatic wireless................................................. 39

Figure 26. Single line diagram of electrical upgrades to support BEBs..................................................... 41

Figure 27. Total estimated cost of ownership ............................................................................................. 46
xi

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

List of Tables

Table ES-1. BEB Efficiency by Temperature and Mass (kWh/km)............................................................ vi

Table 1. Average Meteorological Conditions for Surat................................................................................ 4

Table 2. Overview of Surat Transit System.................................................................................................. 6

Table 3. Surat Transit Depots and Operators................................................................................................ 7

Table 4. Overview of Surat BRTS Routes.................................................................................................... 7

Table 5. Key Specifications for Battery Electric Buses Available in India ................................................ 11

Table 7. BRTS Route Summary Statistics from Logged Data.................................................................... 20

Table 8. BEB Efficiency by Temperature and Mass (kWh/km)................................................................. 30

Table 9. Years to Reach 80% Charge Capacity .......................................................................................... 34

Table 10. Bus Purchase Costs Before and After FAME Incentives............................................................ 38

Table 11. Utility Setup Charges for 600 and 1,000 kVA Transformers ..................................................... 41

Table 12. Distribution Transformer Costs .................................................................................................. 41

Table 13. Fuel Cost Per Bus ....................................................................................................................... 43

Table 14. Maintenance Costs for Electric and Diesel Buses from NREL Evaluations .............................. 44

Table 15. Life-cycle Operating Costs......................................................................................................... 45
1

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

1 Introduction and Background

This study examines current operations, transit assets, and infrastructure of the Surat Bus Rapid 

Transit System (BRTS) in the Indian state of Gujarat and assesses the operational and economic 

feasibility of transitioning from diesel buses to battery electric buses (BEBs). It includes 

assessments of BEB range under various scenarios and potential battery life for different 

chemistries, as well as life-cycle cost comparisons. The analysis leverages advanced vehicle 

modeling and analysis tools developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to

identify candidates for fleet electrification at reasonable costs. This report outlines a range of 

potential outcomes that could be validated through future pilot studies of BEBs on Surat roads.

1.1 Partner Organizations

Researchers from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) NREL partnered with Sardar 

Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT) Surat to conduct an operational 

feasibility and economic analysis of Surat BRTS vehicles.

1.1.1 NREL

NREL helps U.S. and international fleet operators assess the operational and economic feasibility 

of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) including BEBs. NREL has developed a suite of tools and 

resources to assist fleets in quantifying efficiency benefits of AFVs.

2

NREL was asked to provide unbiased, objective analysis to the Surat Municipal Corporation 

(SMC) on the feasibility of BEBs. NREL's experience in evaluating, measuring, and verifying

fleets’ deployment of advanced medium- and heavy-duty vehicle technologies has illustrated the 

relationship between vocational duty cycle and efficiency for different fuel types, as well as the 

potential impacts on life-cycle costs, barriers to implementation, and commercial viability.3

NREL used fleet analysis tools and validation experience to estimate the fuel economy, auxiliary 

load, required battery capacity, and economic feasibility for the SMC on BRTS routes.

1.1.2 SVNIT

SVNIT was founded in 1961with a focus on higher education for civil, mechanical, and electrical 

engineering. It has since expanded to electronics, computer, production, and chemical 

engineering, and the electrical engineering department has developed expertise in the utility and 

automotive sectors. NREL partnered with SVNIT in the development of this assessment to 

leverage the institute’s knowledge of the Surat utility structure and relationships with the SMC. 

SVNIT played an instrumental role in the collection of data and coordination of responsibility.4

Varsha Shah, an SVNIT professor of electrical engineering, also assisted NREL by developing 

an estimate of transformer costs to support electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) in Surat 

BRTS parking areas (Section 6.1.2).

 

2 NREL. 2018 “Transportation Research: Data and Tools.” https://www.nrel.gov/transportation/data-tools.html.

[Accessed: September 21, 2018]. 3 Kotz, et al. 2018. National Park Service Bus Electrification Study Interim Report. Unreleased 4 http://www.svnit.ac.in/index.php. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
2

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

1.1.3 SMC

SMC is the local governing body of the Surat district. It was established in 1966. SMC carries 

out all the tasks and functions with the mission “to make Surat a dynamic, vibrant, beautiful, 

self-reliant and sustainable city with all basic amenities, to provide a better quality of life.”5

There are nine main departments in the SMC: engineering, health, support revenue, social 

welfare, secretary, fire and emergency services, culture, and watch and ward. SMC is the key 

stakeholder in this project, along with the residents of Surat. The BRTS division of the 

engineering department oversees the BRTS transportation within Surat district. SMC coordinated 

with SVNIT and NREL, provided BRTS route and bus information, and provided access to the 

conventional BRTS buses for installation and monitoring of loggers.

1.2 Surat, India

Surat is located on the western side of India (Figure 1). It is one of the major cities in the Gujarat 

state. In 2011, Surat district had a population of 4.5 million,

6 making it the second-largest city in 

Gujarat and ninth-largest in India.

7 Due to Surat’s geographical location, many large industries 

including textile, trade, diamond cutting and polishing, Zari8 works, chemical, petrochemical, 

and natural gas-based businesses have developed there.

The tropical climate in Surat—with a high average daily temperature of 31.3°C in May and a low 

of 22.8°C in January—impacts the viability of BEBs in two ways. First, air conditioning is a 

significant auxiliary load requiring larger battery capacity. Second, high temperatures negatively 

impact the longevity of lithium-ion batteries.9

 

5 Surat Municipal Corporation. 2019. “Corporation Introduction.” 

https://www.suratmunicipal.gov.in/Corporation/Introduction. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 6 Surat Municipal Corporation. 2019. “City Introduction.” https://www.suratmunicipal.gov.in/TheCity/Introduction. 

[Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 7 WikiTravel. 2019. “Surat.” https://wikitravel.org/en/Surat. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 8 Utsavpedia. 2019. “Zari.” https://www.utsavpedia.com/motifs-embroideries/zari-the-ultimate-precious-metalweaving-art/. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 9 Pesaran, et al. 2013. “Addressing the Impact of Temperature Extremes on 

Large Format Li-Ion Batteries for Vehicle Applications.” https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/58145.pdf
3

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

 

Figure 1. Location of Surat, India10

 

10 Google Maps. 2019. “Surat, Gujarat, India.” 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Surat,+Gujarat,+India/@22.6669265,70.5465757,4.99z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x3

be04e59411d1563:0xfe4558290938b042!8m2!3d21.1702401!4d72.8310607. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
4

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 1. Average Meteorological Conditions for Surat11

Average Temperature

Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

°C 27.6 22.8 24.3 28 30.4 31.3 30.3 28.2 27.8 28.2 29.2 26.8 24

Average High Temperature

Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

°C 33.4 30.9 32.4 35.8 37.2 36.2 33.8 30.8 30.4 31.8 35.3 34.3 32

Average Low Temperature

Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

°C 21.7 14.7 16.2 20.1 23.6 26.3 26.7 25.5 25.1 24.6 23 19.2 15.9

Average Number of Days Above 32°C

Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Days 173 3 9 22 27 28 21 6 3 11 23 16 5

Average Precipitation

Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

mm 1117 2.1 1 0.8 2.2 6.4 212.8 440.8 233.4 169.7 33.5 12.4 2.1

1.3 Surat Transit System

Surat has a well-connected transport system, with 275 city buses and an additional 127 BRTS 

buses operating on multiple routes within the city. The BRTS buses have access to dedicated 

lanes (Figure 2), where they travel fixed routes at set times without traffic concerns impeding 

their predictability. The reliability of these routes makes them good candidates for BEBs, which

are primarily constrained by driving range and recharge time. A countervailing consideration is 

that BRTS buses currently offer air conditioning, which can add a significant auxiliary load on 

the BEB energy storage system (ESS), reducing the effective driving range. The set routes could 

also provide convenient locations for extreme fast charging, especially where the BRTS routes 

overlap.

1.3.1 Transit Business Model

City and BRTS buses operate on a cross cost model. In this partnership, private firms operate the 

buses under the control of SMC. All operating expenses such as maintenance, fuel, and driver 

salaries are incurred by the operator. SMC pays an agreed price per kilometer to the operator to 

cover these expenses, and in return, SMC collects all the bus fare proceeds. An agreement 

between SMC and the operator identifies a set daily distance that each bus must run, irrespective 

of the number of passengers on board. In addition, the contract specifies the number of years that 

each operator shall operate the buses.

 

11 WeatherBase. 2019. “Surat, India.” 

https://www.weatherbase.com/weather/weather.php3?s=4824&cityname=Surat-Gujarat-India&units=metric. 

[Accessed: January 17, 2019].
5

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

1.3.2 BRTS Background

Development and operation of BRTS for the city of Surat is managed by Surat Sitilink Limited, a 

wholly owned subsidiary of SMC. SMC defines BRTS as, “A multifaceted project which 

integrates land use and transport, various forms of public transport services as well as other 

motorized and nonmotorized modes through various physical, operational and policy 

interventions to achieve the objective of making Surat an accessible and competitive city.”12

The Surat BRTS includes roadways that are dedicated to buses as shown in Figure 2. The buses 

have priority at the intersections where they interact with other traffic.

Figure 2. BRTS bus in Surat13

1.3.3 Surat Transit System Operations

SMC provided information about Surat’s transit bus system to NREL to begin this evaluation

with a characterization of the current transit operations. Figure 3 displays the span of transit 

routes across the geographic area of Surat, and Table 2 provides a brief overview of the BRTS 

and city portions of the transit service.

 

12 Surat Municipal Corporation. 2019. “BRTS Cell Introduction.” 

https://www.suratmunicipal.gov.in/Departments/BRTSCellIntroduction. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 13 Times of India. 2017. “City buses, 3 BRTS routes await inauguration.” 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/surat/city-buses-3-brts-routes-awaitinauguration/articleshow/57456944.cms. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
6

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 3. Map of Surat transit system14

Table 2. Overview of Surat Transit System

BRTS City Total

Buses 127 275 402

Routes 8 33 41

Depots 3 3 6

Operators 3 2 5

The number of buses for BRTS and city routes are listed by depot and operator in Table 3. Of the 

402 transit buses operating in Surat, 127 are on dedicated BRTS routes, operating out of three of 

the six depots.

 

14 Surat Sitilink Ltd. 2018. Provided by Mustafa Sonasath, Assistant Manager of Operations at Surat Sitilink Ltd. in 

personal correspondence with authors.
7

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 3. Surat Transit Depots and Operators

Depot Operator BRTS Buses City Buses

Bhestan Prasanna Purple 66 -

Pal RTO Adinath 50 -

Kosad Hansa Hansa Travels 11 -

Kosad CSPL Chartered SPL - 1

LP Savani Chartered SPL - 199

Bhestan Garden Maruti - 75

Table 4 lists the number of buses scheduled for each of the eight BRTS routes, along with the 

number of daily trips and daily distance traveled, according to SMC data. Route 18 requires only 

four buses and has the smallest daily distance at 186 km/bus. All other BRTS routes have 12 or 

more buses each scheduled to travel at least 209 km/day.

Table 4. Overview of Surat BRTS Routes

BRTS 

Route

Number 

of 

Buses

Daily Trips,

Peak

Daily Trips, 

Off Peak

Daily Trips, 

Total

Daily 

Distance, 

Total [km]

Daily 

Distance, 

Per Bus [km]

11 13 119 152 271 3,147 242

12 26 145 183 328 6,469 249

14 20 80 164 244 4,856 243

15 16 78 140 218 4,212 263

16 18 100 146 246 3,788 210

17 20 64 136 200 4,180 209

17e 12 103 86 189 3,024 252

18 4 64 46 110 743 186

Figure 4 shows the average fuel economy of the baseline buses––all of which are diesel-fueled––

by daily distance traveled for each BRTS bus route. The routes are identified as BRTS or city 

routes, and the size of the data marker indicates the number of buses operating on each route. 

BRTS routes have four to 26 buses operating on a route, while the city routes range from two to 

14 buses per route. Except for one city route, all buses travel between 150 km and 275 km daily.

It is clear from the figure that BRTS routes generally have the most buses per route, traveling the 

greatest daily distance with the poorest fuel economy. This indicates opportunities to improve 

efficiency and reduce of emissions with the introduction of electrified transit buses.
8

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 4. Average diesel fuel economy by daily driving distance for all routes

SMC plans to electrify a large percentage of its fleet over the next several years, starting with a 

pilot program using 10 to 15 BEBs on BRTS routes. NREL has been engaged to identify existing 

bus routes where BEBs could operate and to estimate the life-cycle costs of the replacement 

BEBs in comparison to acquiring new diesel buses, including an estimate of charging 

infrastructure costs.

1.4 Smart Cities

Surat was selected in the first round of applications in 2016 by the Indian Ministry of Housing 

and Urban Affairs as one of 20 Indian cities to be developed as a “Smart City” under the 

Government of India's Smart Cities Mission. Launched in 2015, the Smart Cities Mission 

promotes sustainable development, transit electrification, and improved urban transport 

options.

15,16

SMC, Special Purpose Vehicles, Surat Sitilink Limited, and Surat Smart City Development 

Limited worked with Google to add real-time bus information in Google Maps, making it

 

15 Times of India. 2015. “Full list of 98 smart cities.” https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Full-list-of-98-smartcities/articleshow/48694723.cms?from=mdr. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 16 Government of India. 2019. "Smart Cities Mission." http://smartcities.gov.in/content/innerpage/smart-cityfeatures.php. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
9

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

possible for commuters to more easily plan their trips. Surat is the first city in Gujarat and second 

in India to launch real-time transit information with Google Maps.

17, 18

SMC has used smart technology to increase bus ridership from 3,000 riders per day in August 

2016 to 65,000 per day by November 2017.19 The focus of this technology has included realtime monitoring at the SMC Smart City Center (Figure 5) to ensure bus reliability and improve 

the rider experience.

Figure 5. SMC Smart City Centre20

 

17 Surat Smart City. 2017. "Real Time Transit Launch." 

http://www.suratsmartcity.com/PressNote/RealTimeTransitLaunch. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 18 Commuters can download the web application “Surat Sitilink” to track buses and pay for tickets at 

https://www.suratmunicipal.gov.in/EServices/SuratSitilinkApp. [Accessed April 12, 2019]. 19 Dash. 2017. “How Surat got people to ditch autorickshaw rides, opt for buses,” 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/how-surat-got-people-to-ditch-autorickshaw-rides-opt-forbuses/articleshow/61611309.cms. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 20 Desai. 2019.
10

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

2 Battery Electric Bus Market

There appear to be at least seven automotive manufacturers currently offering or planning to 

offer BEBs to the India market, but NREL researchers were only able to obtain data on offerings

from three manufacturers at the time of writing this report: BYD (partnered with Goldstone 

Infratech Ltd.), Tata Motors Ltd., and Ashok Leyland.

21, 22, 23 Considering the size of the bus 

market in India, the aggressive incentive programs available from the Indian government for 

adoption of BEBs, and the growing international market of BEB manufacturers, it is likely that 

more electric options will be offered in the near future.

Based on the available information, two different models of BEBs are offered by each of the 

three automotive manufacturers. Table 5 summarizes and compares the key specifications across 

the three established manufacturers. Currently, none of the manufacturers are offering BEBs with 

on-route charging capability, although Ashok Leyland offers a swappable battery pack.

 

21 Government of India, DHI. 2018. “Recommendations of the Committee Constituted to Decide Benchmark Price 

for Electric Buses to be Procured by Different STUs, for Release of Demand Incentives.”

https://dhi.nic.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/Benchmark%20price%20for%20Electric%20Buses63666299596397561

6.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 22 Singh, Saluja. 2018. “Goldstone-BYD, Tata Motors grab E-Bus contracts.” 

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/goldstone-byd-tata-motors-grab-e-buscontracts/articleshow/63406325.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst. 

[Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 23 UITP. n.d. “Electric Buses Procurement In India – Indian Cities Got The Viable Rates.” 

https://india.uitp.org/sites/default/files/documents/Procurement%20of%20Electric%20buses%20in%20India%20-

%2020032018.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
11

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 5. Key Specifications for Battery Electric Buses Available in India

2.1 Policies and Incentives

SMC is interested in deploying BEBs to reduce pollution in the Surat urban area as part of a 

broader strategy coordinated by the Indian national government. India has prioritized BEBs 

through an incentive program known as Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Hybrid and 

Electric Vehicles (FAME). 

The original FAME I program provided incentives for up to 60% of the purchase cost of BEBs 

and capped those incentives at ₹10M or ₹8.5M depending on the percentage of localization 

(or the percentage of bus manufacturing within India). 24, 25 FAME I offered an incentive for 

 

24 The majority of the monetary values in this report are written in Indian rupees (denoted as ₹ or INR) or 

derivations as noted (e.g. million INR). NREL used 71.029 INR to 1 U.S. dollar (USD) as the conversion rate in this 

report based on Indian Rupee, the Economy Forecast Agency (http://dollarrupee.in/), January 17, 2019. 25 One lakh = 100,000 INR. One crore = 10,000,000 INR.

OEM

BEB model

Goldstone

-BYD

K7

Goldstone

-BYD

K9

Tata Motors

Ultra Electric

6/9 EV

Tata Motors

Starbus Electric 

9/12 EV

Ashok Leyland

Circuit-F and Circuit-S

GVWR (kg) 13500 18000 10200 16200 —

Size (mm -

length x 

width x 

height)

8900 x 

2465 x 

2930

12000 x 

2520 x 

3340

9000 x 

2340 x 

3380

12000 x 

2570 x 

3700

9400 x 

2600 x 

900

Passenger

Capacity 31 + driver 39 + driver 26 + driver

+ 13 standees

40 + driver

+ 22 standees

23–39 seated

+ 23–30 standing

Motor

Maximum

Power

180 kW 180 kW

145 kW

Operating range: 

0–2,500 rpm

145 kW

Operating range: 

0–2,500 rpm

250 kW (peak)

150 kW (continuous) 

Torque: 900 Nm (peak)

360 Nm (continuous)

Battery Size 

(kWh) 162 kWh 324 kWh — — 256 kWh or

64 kWh (swappable)

Electrical 

Regeneration Available Available Available Available Available

Range (km) Up to 200 

km

Up to 250 

km

215 km

(as per CMVR)

151 km

(as per CMVR) —

Charging 

Time (hours) 2–3 hours 4–5 hours

6–7 hours

(slow option)

2.5–3 hours

(fast option)

6–7 hours

(slow option)

2.5–3 hours

(fast option)

Less than 3 hours
12

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

BEB charging infrastructure as well, providing an additional 10% on top of the total bus 

incentive. 26, 27

The Government of India superseded FAME I with a proposal for the FAME II program in April 

2019. The FAME II proposal provides BEB incentives based on the size of the energy storage 

system (ESS). Every kWh of ESS in a BEB qualifies for ₹20,000 in grant funding up to 40% of 

the cost of the vehicle. 28 In addition, FAME II will cover up to 100% of the project costs of one 

slow charger per BEB or one fast charger for every ten buses.29

Indian policies such as the National Auto Fuel Policy 2003 and the Auto Fuel Vision & Policy 

2025 require diesel buses to produce fewer emissions. The National Green Tribunal, which

resolves environmental disputes involving multidisciplinary issues, has passed a ruling that 

heavy diesel vehicles in the Delhi National Capital Region that are more than 10 years old must 

be retired. In addition, the Bureau of Energy Efficiency Star Ratings is setting higher fuel 

economy standards for buses. The additional emission controls increase the cost of diesel bus 

acquisition and maintenance. As a result, many bus operators are beginning to favor the adoption 

of BEBs.

 

26 Government of India, Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises, DHI. 2017. Minutes of the 9th Meeting 

of the Project Implementation and Sanctioning Committee Held Under the Chairmanship of Secretary Heavy 

Industry on 20th December 2017. https://dhi.nic.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/dhi-didm-MOM9-meetingPISC.pdf. 

[Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 27 This report uses 71.029 USD to INR as the conversion rates per “Indian Rupee: The Economy Forecast Agency,” 

http://dollarrupee.in/. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 1 lakh = 100,000 INR; 1 crore = 1,000,000 INR. 28 Government of India, DHI. 2019. Operational Guidelines for Delivery of Demand Incentive under FAME India 

Scheme: Phase - II - regarding. https://dhi.nic.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/DHI%20FAME%20PHASEII22March2019.pdf. [Accessed April 8, 2019]. 29 Government of India, DHI. 2019. Notification: Scheme for Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Vehicles in 

India Phase II (FAME Phase II). https://www.fame-india.gov.in/WriteReadData/userfiles/file/FAMEII%20Notification.pdf. [Accessed April 12, 2019].
13

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

3 Approach

In June 2018, NREL researchers traveled to Surat to collect data on BRTS and city bus 

operations, and to meet with the SMC commissioner, staff, and partners at SVNIT Surat. The 

primary purpose of this trip was to gather second-by-second data on bus operation, including 

velocity and location, which NREL then distilled into operation statistics to estimate BEB 

feasibility.

3.1 Data Collection

NREL worked with SMC and SVNIT Surat to compile information on the Surat BRTS and city 

buses. In its Surat Smart City Center, SMC collects data on key operational characteristics of its 

buses (Figure 5) such as number of trips, distance traveled, fuel consumed and arrival/departure 

time for all routes. SMC also collects GPS data on its buses at a rate of one sample every three to 

five seconds.

In addition to utilizing the sample data provided by SMC, NREL installed data loggers on 

existing baseline buses to develop a detailed characterization of each BRTS route, beyond 

scheduled stop times and average speed data available from SMC. NREL used Trip Recorder 

747 ProS GPS recorders (Figure 6) to instrument 16 buses operating on BRTS routes and 24 

buses operating on City routes. The trip recorders logged latitude, longitude, elevation, and 

vehicle speed at a frequency of one hertz (Hz) when the instrumented buses were in motion. The 

data were collected over four days in June 2018.

Figure 6. Trip Recorder 747 ProS

Although data were collected on city bus routes as well, NREL focused on the BRTS routes 

where SMC intends to begin its deployment of BEBs. The collected data were analyzed for 

quality and for adherence of each bus to the planned route. Minimal data processing was 

necessary to eliminate a few outliers from the dataset, and a vehicle speed of less than 0.5 

kilometers per hour (kph) was considered to be zero for the purpose of this analysis, due to 

known GPS scatter at low speeds. Extraneous trips not adhering to the planned BRTS route for 

each bus were removed from the dataset. In addition, because this analysis focused on the 

requirements for full days of transit service on each route, partial days of operation were not 

included in the analysis. Except for Route 18, which has a scheduled daily distance of 186 km 

per bus, a daily distance traveled of 200 km or more per bus was considered a full day of service
14

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

for the BRTS routes. Due to the short logging duration and the variability of operation for some 

of the instrumented buses, the installed data loggers captured between one and four full 

workdays for each of the eight BRTS routes, for a total of 19 days of operation.

3.2 BRTS Route Characterization

NREL has developed a suite of tools that characterize vehicle drive cycles and analyze driving 

behavior for a wide variety of vehicle types, weight classes, and vocations. One of these tools—a 

component of the Drive-cycle Rapid Investigation, Visualization, and Evaluation (DRIVE) 

analysis toolset30—uses vehicle speed data with a sampling frequency of one Hz or higher to

calculate an extensive set of route statistics. The route-specific metrics calculated from these 

driving speed profiles are independent of vehicle size, type, or powertrain, allowing the routes to 

be characterized and compared objectively and quantitatively. Examples of the metrics include 

maximum and average driving speeds, acceleration and deceleration rates, stop durations, and 

number of stops per kilometer.

Two notable route metrics are the characteristic acceleration, ã, and aerodynamic speed, νaero, 

described by O’Keefe, et al., and derived from the energy-based road load equation.

31 Dividing 

characteristic acceleration by the square of aerodynamic speed (Equation 1) defines kinetic 

intensity (ki), another important metric that represents the ratio of specific inertial energy 

required to propel a vehicle to the specific energy lost to aerodynamic drag. Kinetic intensity is a 

measure of the aggressiveness or driving intensity of a route and is a reliable indication of the 

suitability for electric/hybrid powertrains.

kkkk = cchaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ss )2 = ã(ννaaaaaaaa)2 (1)

The collected speed data for each of the 19 full BRTS work days were fed into the NREL 

analysis to create a detailed characterization of each BRTS route for further comparison. 

Statistics for routes that had more than one valid day of collected data were averaged across all 

valid days to establish one set of representative statistics for each BRTS route—eight in total.

NREL has also developed the Fleet DNA database with detailed commercial vehicle drive-cycle 

data.

32 This extensive collection of real-world driving profiles and aggregated summary statistics 

enables researchers and analysts to evaluate operational characteristics and vehicle performance 

considerations for dozens of different vehicle types, vocations, weight classes, locations, and 

powertrains, leading to optimized vehicle-route combinations. Transit bus data available in the 

FleetDNA database were used in NREL’s analysis of the Surat BRTS routes.

 

30 NREL. 2018. “DRIVE: Drive-Cycle Rapid Investigation, Visualization, and Evaluation Analysis Tool.” 

https://www.nrel.gov/transportation/drive.html. [Accessed: January 21, 2019]. 31 O’Keefe, et al. 2007. “Duty Cycle Characterization and Evaluation Toward Heavy Hybrid Vehicle Applications.” 

SAE World Congress and Exhibition. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/fy07/40929.pdf. [Accessed: 32 NREL. 2018. “Fleet DNA: Commercial Fleet Vehicle Operating Data.” 

https://www.nrel.gov/transportation/fleettest-fleet-dna.html. [Accessed: January 18, 2019].
15

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

3.3 ESS Model Description

3.3.1 Model Description

With GPS speed as the only available in-use data, NREL developed a variation of the FASTSim

modeling tool to analyze the power requirements and battery size for the Surat electric buses.

33

FASTSim and the derivation used for this report are backward-looking models, meaning that 

with knowledge of the vehicle state (i.e., speed, acceleration, vehicle characteristics, etc.), it 

solves to find the power requirement necessary to achieve that state. Inputs to the model are 

vehicle speed, road grade, and the data sampling increment (timestep). Each component takes a 

backwards step in series, with the model using logged data to calculate the power to or from the 

battery. Diagram 1 shows the chronology of the simulation.

Battery  Motor  Transmission  Differential  Wheel  Chassis  Logged Data (1)

In Equation 2, recorded data are used to calculate the total force necessary from the vehicle in 

order to meet the driving profile. The road load equation is simpler for a vehicle tested on a

dynamometer, as the road grade is held constant at zero.

FF = dd

dt + CC vv2 + mmmm (2)

The wheel model converts linear force, FF, and speed, vv, to torque, ττ, and rotational speed, ωω, 

respectively, using the radius of the tire, rr , in Equations 3 and 4.

ττwwh = FF rr (3)

ωωwwh = vv hiiiiii

tt

(4)

Components with gears will modify the speed and torque using Equations 5 and 6, respectively,

using knowledge of the gear ratio, rrgg . The component efficiency, ηη, is used to divide the 

torque in traction (ηη−1 ) and multiply the torque in regeneration (ηη+1 ).

ωω = ωω rrgg (5)

ττ = ττtt tttt

gg

ηη±1 (6)

Rotational speed and torque are multiplied and divided by gear ratios and efficiencies in the 

driveline until the motor, where the electrical power requirement is calculated in Equation 7.

PPbb = ττ ωω ηη (ττ , ωω ) ±1 (7)

 

33 NREL. 2018. “FASTSim: Future Automotive Systems Technology Simulator.”

https://www.nrel.gov/transportation/fastsim.html. [Accessed: January 18, 2019].
16

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Motor efficiency is a function of speed and torque. The motor map used in the model is shown in 

Figure 7. This efficiency map was derived from electric transit bus data stored in NREL’s 

FleetDNA database.

Figure 7. Motor efficiency map

The model was validated using data from BEBs operating in California. In most cases, measured 

and modeled daily consumption matched within 10% (as seen in Figure 8), indicating that the 

model is a good approximation of real-world transit bus operations. However, the authors did not 

have access to the buses specifically available in India. Additionally, the data collected in 

California included road grade. Elevation data collected in Surat was deemed not sufficiently 

accurate for road-grade estimation; thus, energy consumption was simulated without road grade. 

The model will under-predict energy consumption when road grade is not included, with only

limited effect as Surat is a relatively flat city.
17

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 8: Comparison of modeled results to measured results
18

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

4 Operational Assessment Results

Following the approach outlined in Section 3, the logged vehicle data were analyzed to 

characterize each BRTS route. The speed profiles from all 19 BRTS bus days were applied to 

NREL’s model to determine the daily BEB energy requirements for each route. Researchers also

investigated temperature and mass sensitivities. The results show that the high kinetic intensity 

of Surat BRTS routes translates to significant efficiency improvements by using BEBs. 

Depending on temperature and mass, the results indicate that a significant portion of the Surat 

BRTS fleet could be replaced by BEBs currently available in India.

4.1 BRTS Route Profiles and Statistics

The map in Figure 9 shows the paths of all eight BRTS routes and the locations of the depots 

where the BRTS buses are housed. The BRTS system operates along major corridors and spans a 

wide portion of Surat’s geographic area. Significant sections of the routes overlap, utilizing 

shared depots and bus lanes. These areas of overlap could be effective locations for on-route fast 

chargers, which could supplement depot chargers or serve as primary power sources. Individual 

BRTS route maps are available in Appendix A.

Figure 9. Map of logged BRTS routes and depot locations
19

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 10 provides an example of a typical speed profile for BRTS routes, showing more than 14 

hours of total daily operation with a vehicle speed fluctuating frequently between 0 kph and 50 

kph. The Route 11 bus accumulated approximately 240 km during this day. 

Figure 10. Example daily drive cycle - Route 11

NREL generated detailed driving statistics from all 19 speed profiles for analysis of the BRTS 

routes. Statistics for routes which had more than one full day of collected data were averaged. A 

selection of the average summary statistics is listed in Table 7.

A typical full day of service for a bus operating on a BRTS route covers 200–280 km during 10–

15 hours of operation. Route 18 is an exception, having a smaller total distance due to the slower 

average speed and shorter route length, yet it still covers nearly 180 km in 12.8 hours. Most 

routes have a daily driving time (when the vehicle is moving) of 9–11 hours and a driving 

average speed of 22–28 kph. Route 11 and 18 have slower speeds, at 16.0 and 17.5 kph, 

respectively. Average stops per kilometer for the BRTS routes range from a low of 1.72 for 

Route 17 to a high of 4.00 for Route 18.
20

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 6. BRTS Route Summary Statistics from Logged Data

BRTS Route 11 12 14 15 16 17 17e 18

Daily Total Distance [km] 239.2 255.8 226.4 276.0 206.5 242.5 223.2 178.3

Daily Total Time [hrs] 14.5 14.9 11.0 14.5 11.5 10.8 11.9 12.8

Daily Driving Time [hrs] 10.0 10.3 9.2 11.0 9.1 8.9 9.3 10.2

Maximum Speed [kph] 52.9 58.5 62.2 64.7 62.4 55.6 59.7 58.7

Total Average Speed [kph] 16.4 17.2 20.6 19.0 18.0 22.4 18.8 13.9

Driving Average Speed [kph] 24.0 24.8 24.7 25.1 22.7 27.2 24.0 17.5

Average Acceleration [m/s2] 0.30 0.32 0.41 0.33 0.39 0.35 0.43 0.36

Average Deceleration [m/s2] -0.60 -0.72 -0.53 -0.54 -0.51 -0.43 -0.47 -0.41

Average Stop Duration [sec] 25.7 22.9 11.4 18.8 14.1 16.2 15.5 12.9

Median Stop Duration [sec] 8.0 8.0 5.0 6.0 5.5 4.0 6.0 4.0

Stops per Kilometer [1/km] 2.66 2.74 2.52 2.42 2.92 1.72 2.64 4.00

Kinetic Intensity [1/km] 2.08 2.09 2.17 1.85 2.21 1.54 1.83 2.79
21

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 11 plots the kinetic intensity and driving average speed of each route. The kinetic 

intensity is a measure of the aggressiveness or intensity of driving on a route, as detailed in 

Section 3.2. Routes with frequent stops and higher kinetic intensity are generally good 

candidates for vehicle electrification, because they can capitalize on the use of efficient electric 

motors and ample opportunities to recuperate inertial energy through regenerative braking.

Route 18 has a low driving average speed and the highest kinetic intensity at 2.79 km-1, and 

Route 17 has the highest driving average speed and the lowest kinetic intensity at 1.54 km-1. If 

considering only the ability to recapture energy from braking, Route 18 would be the best 

candidate for electrification. However, both routes have relatively high kinetic intensity 

compared to the high-speed long-haul applications common among tractor trailers. 

Overlaid on the chart for reference are corresponding transit bus data from NREL’s FleetDNA34

database of real-world drive cycles. These data points show the relationship between ki and 

driving average speed for transit buses operating at various locations throughout the United 

States. As this figure represents primarily city transit routes, it is not expected that these data 

necessarily will match the characteristics of the BRTS routes, but it is worth noting that the 

BRTS routes fall on the lower-speed side of the data cluster and tend to have above average 

kinetic intensity for this type of vehicle operation, relative to the selection of U.S. transit buses.

Figure 12 shows the relationship between the characteristic acceleration and the aerodynamic 

speed, with lines of constant kinetic intensity included for reference. The BRTS routes are 

clustered around a kinetic intensity of 2 km-1

, which is slightly higher than most of the FleetDNA 

data points.

 

34 NREL. 2018. “Fleet DNA: Commercial Fleet Vehicle Operating Data.” 

https://www.nrel.gov/transportation/fleettest-fleet-dna.html. [Accessed: January 18, 2019].
22

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 11. Kinetic intensity vs driving average speed for BRTS routes

Figure 12. Characteristic acceleration vs aerodynamic speed for BRTS routes
23

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

4.2 BEB Modeling Results

The electric transit bus model described in Section 3.3 was used to simulate BEB operation on 

all eight BRTS routes. Input to the model was an entire day of logged vehicle speed data for each 

route—the same speed profiles used to develop the route statistics. Where multiple days of 

operation were recorded for a route, all days were simulated independently—19 in all. The 

model calculates the energy required for a BEB to drive the route in exactly the same way it was 

driven by the conventional vehicle, as demonstrated in Figure 13, where the “measured” trend 

line is recorded data from a conventional bus and the “modeled” line is the speed achieved by the 

electric bus model.

Figure 13. Example speed profile for a measured conventional bus and the modeled electric bus

The driving speed profile is used to estimate instantaneous power required from the vehicle 

battery as shown in Figure 14. If the model is able to complete the route without deviating 

significantly from the speed profile of the conventional vehicle—that is, the simulated electric

bus meets the required driving performance for the route—then the battery power estimate can 

be integrated over an entire day to calculate the total energy used by the vehicle.
24

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 14. Instantaneous power requirement and cumulative energy use

The Sankey diagram in Figure 15 shows an example of the flow path of energy through the BEB

as simulated on Route 11. In the BEB model, electricity is converted to rotational power used to 

overcome drag and friction forces and to accelerate the vehicle. When the brakes are applied, a 

portion of that energy is recaptured and returned to the battery through the electric motor during 

regenerative braking. By recapturing energy through regenerative braking, electrified drivetrains 

(hybrids included) partially recharge their batteries using energy that would otherwise be 

dissipated as heat from conventional brake pads. Absent from the diagram is energy used by the 

bus to climb hills. Elevation data logged from Surat was not accurate enough to approximate the 

grade of the road for modeling purposes. However, Surat is a relatively flat city. 

In contrast, the flow of energy for a nonhybrid conventional bus is unidirectional, and none of 

the kinetic energy of the bus can be recaptured (Figure 16). For both bus types, the model 

incorporates energy losses due to aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, mechanical friction, and 

thermal losses in vehicle components, as well as energy used for auxiliary vehicle loads such as 

air conditioning and on-board electronics. Notably, most inefficiencies are the same for electric 

and diesel buses, such as rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag, but an electric motor can 

operate at a much higher average rate of efficiency than is possible for a diesel engine. This is 

largely a factor of diesel buses losing significant amounts of energy due to heat rejection from 

combustion and engine losses.
25

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 15. Sankey diagram displaying the dissipation of battery energy for a BEB on Route 11, 

normalized by route distance

Figure 16. Sankey diagram displaying the dissipation of fuel energy for a conventional bus on 

Route 11, normalized by route distance
26

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Using the results of the vehicle model, Figure 17 compares the fuel economy of the diesel buses 

and BEBs for each BRTS route. The diesel bus results are averages of data from the existing 

diesel buses in service as provided by SMC. The BEB fuel economy values are modeling results 

assuming a vehicle mass of 14,000 kg, a constant ambient temperature of 28°C, and dry road 

conditions. The electrical energy consumption (kWh) for the BEBs was converted to diesel liter 

equivalent (dLe) fuel consumption using a conversion factor of 9.94 kWh/dLe. The modeled 

results for BEBs were generally three to five times more fuel efficient than the conventional 

diesel bus fuel records for the relevant routes. This benefit is especially pronounced on routes 

with low average speed and more stops per mile.

Figure 17. Fuel economy by BRTS route for baseline diesel buses (measured in-use data) and 

BEBs (modeled results)

A chief concern when adopting electric vehicles is driving range. Assuming that BEBs will be 

required to drive the same routes for the same distance between recharging events as the 

conventional buses, a minimum battery size can be estimated. The required battery size will be 

determined by the daily distance and the average energy consumption rate (kWh/km) of the bus. 

In addition to route characteristics (average speed, driving intensity, etc.), the two factors that 

most significantly impact the energy consumption rate include vehicle mass (vehicle + 

passengers) and weather conditions. Heavier buses consume more energy, vehicle airconditioning systems require a significant amount of energy in Surat’s extremely hot climate, 

and the city’s monsoon season could impact bus energy consumption as well.

Figure 18 shows the impact of daily average ambient temperature on the energy consumption 

rate of the electric bus. The BEB was modeled on each BRTS route with the daily average 

temperature ranging from 15°C to 40°C. As the temperature increases, more energy is required 

to run auxiliary air conditioning loads, which increases the BEB’s overall energy consumption 

rate by approximately 0.08 kWh/km for every 5°C of temperature increase. The average ambient 
27

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

temperature in Surat is 28°C. Ambient temperature was used primarily to estimate power 

consumption by the vehicle’s air conditioning system.

Figure 18. Impact of ambient temperature on BEB energy consumption rate

Road wetness influences vehicle efficiency as well. Ejsmont, J., et al. found that a 0.8 mm water 

film could increase the rolling resistance of tires traveling at 30 km/hr by 30% compared to dry 

conditions.35 These tests took place in Denmark in October and may not be perfectly applicable 

to Surat's climate. The report authors noted that tires cooled off more on wet roads, partially 

deflating them, which accounted for an undetermined percentage of the impacts to rolling 

resistance. In addition to this confounding factor, driving speeds are likely to decrease on wet 

roads, potentially mitigating the impact of impaired rolling resistance. Furthermore, the monsoon 

season in Surat typically takes place from July to September, when average daily high 

 

35 Ejsmont, J., et. al. 2015. "Influence of Road Wetness on Tire-Pavement Rolling Resistance." Journal of Civil 

Engineering and Architecture 9. http://www.davidpublisher.org/Public/uploads/Contribute/566e64a472e9f.pdf. 
28

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

temperatures and air conditioning needs tend to be lower than average, but not as low as average 

October temperatures in Denmark. Road testing on Surat roads or a similar climate during dry 

and wet conditions would be the best way to determine these effects. Driving through deep 

flooding may also present safety and functionality concerns for BEB traction batteries.

The energy consumption rate (or efficiency) of the BEB is sensitive to the total vehicle weight—

the sum of the vehicle curb weight and weight of passengers—which should not exceed the gross 

vehicle weight rating (GVWR). The starting curb weight of a bus can vary significantly between 

models based on overall size and construction, ESS capacity and other factors, yet is essentially 

constant for the life of the bus. The total weight of the bus in operation varies continuously based 

on passenger loading. 

Figure 19 highlights the impact of the vehicle weight on the BEB’s energy consumption rate. 

Assuming an ambient temperature of 28°C, the BEB was modeled on each BRTS route with 

vehicle mass settings swept from 7,000 kg to 18,000 kg. This represents the estimated range of 

vehicle mass from the commercially-available BEBs described in Table 5, according to 

specifications of GVWR and passenger loading. The range of estimated vehicle mass 

corresponding to each BEB in the table is shown at the bottom of Figure 19.
29

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 19. Impact of vehicle mass on BEB energy consumption rate

As a point of comparison, Table 8 outlines a range of efficiencies that can be expected at any 

given point in time, depending on temperature and bus mass including the passenger load. For 

context, the GVWR of the Tata 9-meter BEB is 10,200 kg, and the GVWR for the BYD 12-

meter BEB is 18,000 kg (Table 5).
30

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 7. BEB Efficiency by Temperature and Mass (kWh/km)

Mass (kg) Temperature (°C)

25 28 30 35 40

7,000 0.56 0.61 0.64 0.72 0.80

8,000 0.60 0.65 0.68 0.76 0.84

9,000 0.64 0.69 0.72 0.80 0.89

10,000 0.69 0.74 0.77 0.85 0.93

11,000 0.74 0.79 0.82 0.90 0.98

12,000 0.79 0.84 0.88 0.96 1.04

13,000 0.85 0.90 0.94 1.02 1.10

14,000 0.92 0.97 1.00 1.08 1.17

15,000 0.99 1.04 1.07 1.15 1.24

16,000 1.07 1.12 1.15 1.23 1.32

17,000 1.15 1.20 1.23 1.31 1.40

18,000 1.23 1.28 1.32 1.40 1.48

Identifying the appropriate ESS capacity for BEBs can be challenging. It is important that the 

buses have sufficient range to meet the daily service requirements of the BRTS routes without 

significantly oversizing the ESS, which would increase bus mass and incur unnecessary capital 

costs.

The minimum size of battery required for the BEB to meet the daily service needs of BRTS 

routes is determined by the energy consumption rate of the BEB and the daily distance traveled. 

Energy consumption rates could range from a low of approximately 0.74 kWh/km for a lighter 

(10,000 kg) bus operating on a mild-temperature (28°C) day, ) to a high of approximately 1.32 

kWh/km for a heavy (16,000 kg) bus operating on a hot (40°C) day in Surat. Factoring in the 

daily distance variation for BRTS routes results in a wide range of potential minimum ESS sizes.

It is helpful to consider how much of the existing BRTS bus fleet could be electrified (replaced 

by BEBs) for each increase in ESS capacity. Each BRTS route has a different daily range 

requirement, which means service on different routes could be achieved by BEBs with different 

ESS capacities. Each of the eight routes also has a different number of buses operating every 

day, adding up to the total BRTS fleet of 127 buses. 

Figure 20 shows how the minimum ESS capacity corresponds to the cumulative percentage of 

BRTS fleet that could be electrified, for a range of average efficiencies. The left trend line in the 

figure represents conditions of higher efficiency (an average energy consumption rate of 0.74

kWh/km for a 10,000 kg bus at 28°C), and the right trend line represents lower fuel efficiency 

conditions (an energy consumption rate of 1.32 kWh/km for a 16,000 kg bus at 40°C). The thick 

blue trend line in the middle corresponds to an average efficiency of 1.08 kWh/km for a 14,000 

kg bus at 35°C. As the ESS capacity increases, each step change in the trend lines represents the 

number of buses operating on one of the eight routes, in order of increasing daily route distance, 

thereby showing the cumulative percentage of the BRTS service met by BEBs.
31

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

For example, assuming an average efficiency of 1.08 kWh/km (thick blue line), BEBs with 250 

kWh of energy storage could replace over 40% of the BRTS buses—those operating on Routes 

18, 16, 17e, and 14. BEBs with ESS capacity of at least 280 kWh could replace almost 90% of 

the fleet. Electrifying 100% of the BRTS fleet with buses of a single type or size would require 

BEBs with ESS capacity of 300 kWh or greater, for this middle efficiency case. 

Because the BRTS bus fleet will not be electrified all at once, SMC can use this relationship to 

plan the acquisition of each additional group of BEBs based on the routes to be electrified, the 

expected efficiency, the size of ESS available, and the number of buses being purchased. To 

begin, SMC could acquire the first four BEBs with an ESS capacity of approximately 200 kWh 

and operate them exclusively on Route 18 as an initial pilot program. SMC may also benefit 

from piloting a small number of BEBs along various routes to test the actual range under various 

real-world conditions.

When calculating the necessary ESS capacity for BEBs, SMC should consider that rated battery 

capacity may be larger than usable capacity and that traction batteries will degrade over time. 

Manufacturer warranties often specify 80% or 85% of original capacity as the level at which 

batteries should be replaced, correlating to a required increase in initial ESS capacity of 17% to 

25%. As a point of reference, 312.5 kWh of usable ESS degraded to 80% will provide the 

equivalent range of a 250 kWh ESS.

Figure 20. Cumulative fraction of BRTS bus fleet vs ESS capacity
32

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

5 Battery Life Longevity

Battery lifetime and rate of degradation depend on several factors, including battery chemistry, 

age, temperature, the rate of charge and discharge, and the constantly varying state of charge

(SOC). While a full analysis of battery longevity would exceed the scope of this report, NREL 

researchers investigated the potential degradation of generic versions of the battery chemistries 

under consideration: lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) specified by Ashok Leyland, 

lithium iron phosphate (LFP) specified by BYD, and lithium nickel cadmium aluminum (NCA),

which is another common battery technology. Real-world results will vary based on the 

percentage and configuration of elements used by each manufacturer, pack-cooling technology, 

and other factors, such as the amount of time the battery packs are fully charged each day, which 

puts additional stress on the battery.

NREL conducted an analysis using the Battery Lifetime Analysis and Simulation Tool (BLAST)

to examine battery degradation.

36, 37 The analysis highlighted the sensitivity of battery lifetime to 

differences in chemistry and temperature impacts, rather than predicting the actual battery 

lifetime for BEBs that may be acquired by SMC. Therefore, several assumptions were made to 

simplify the analysis. The team modeled batteries with 500 kWh capacity for the analysis to 

ensure there was excess charging capacity to meet the service requirements of all BRTS routes. 

The batteries were modeled to be discharged according to the power requirements of each route, 

determined by the vehicle power requirements model. They were charged nightly, beginning 

when the bus returned to the depot from each route, and scheduled to charge at a fixed rate 

necessary to reach 100% capacity one hour before the beginning of operation the following day. 

Figure 22 shows the modeled state of charge during a 24-hour period for each BRTS route.

The analysis also considered three temperature scenarios—labeled “Min.”, “Max.”, and 

“Avg.”—where it was assumed that the battery pack temperature matched one of the ambient 

temperature profiles shown in Figure 23. The three profiles are averages of the weekly minimum, 

maximum, and average ambient temperatures, respectively. Without any active battery packcooling, battery temperatures could be significantly higher, which would reduce the lifetime of 

the batteries. Active cooling would maintain lower temperatures, which would extend the battery 

lifetime.

 

36 NREL. “BLAST: Battery Lifetime Analysis and Simulation Tool Suite”. 

https://www.nrel.gov/transportation/blast.html. [Accessed: October 22, 2018]. 37 Neubauer, J., Wood, E. 2014. Thru-life impacts of driver aggression, climate, cabin thermal management, and 

battery thermal management on battery electric vehicle utility. 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775314002766
33

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 21. ESS charge and discharge profile for model

Figure 22. Ambient temperature profiles for model38

 

38 Weatherbase. “Surat.” 2019. https://www.weatherbase.com/weather/weather.php3?s=4824&cityname=SuratGujarat-India&units=metric. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].

0 5 10 15 20 25

Hours

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

SOC, %

R#11

R#12

R#14

R#15

R#16

R#17

R#17e

R#18

0 10 20 30 40 50

Weeks

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Temperature, ° C

Monthly Avg.

Weekly Avg.

Weekly Max.

Weekly Min.
34

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

The analysis considers 20% an acceptable degradation factor. Battery degradation accelerates as 

the overall percentage of nominal capacity is lost, and approximately 80% of nominal capacity is 

a common cutoff level for original equipment manufacturer (OEM) battery warranties.

Based on the assumptions described above, Table 8 displays the estimated number of years of 

operation it will take the various battery technologies to deplete to 80% of their original capacity. 

The results vary based on the technology used, battery temperature, and the daily battery 

depletion along each route. Routes 12 and 15 require the most daily energy, and therefore the 

batteries are more fully depleted, while Route 18 reflects the lowest daily depletion.

Table 8. Years to Reach 80% Charge Capacity

NMC LFP NCA Max ∆SOC

Route Avg. T Max. T Min. T Avg. T Max. T Min. T Avg. T Max. T Min. T 10 Years

11 5.3 1.4 >10 3.5 2.3 5.6 5.6 3.4 9 57.6%

12 3 1 9.4 3.5 2.3 5.6 5.2 3 7.6 67.6%

14 5.8 1.6 >10 3.5 2.3 5.6 5.8 3.5 9.5 53.5%

15 2.9 1 9 3.5 2.3 5.6 5.2 3 7.6 68.3%

16 5.8 1.6 >10 3.5 2.3 5.5 5.7 3.5 9.4 53.9%

17 5.9 1.6 >10 3.5 2.3 5.5 5.8 3.5 9.4 53.0%

17e 6 1.6 >10 3.5 2.3 5.5 5.8 3.5 9.5 52.4%

18 9.5 3 >10 3.5 2.3 5.6 6.2 3.9 >10 43.0%

The biggest takeaway from the battery lifetime analysis is that SMC should require a battery 

warranty acceptable to Surat BRTS as part of the solicitation process. This could include battery 

replacement coverage for the seven-year operational period and 500,000 km that SMC buses are 

likely to run, but SMC will need to work with OEMs to negotiate terms. SMC should also work 

to implement effective smart charging solutions in tandem with the deployment of electric buses 

to maximize battery life.

Actual performance will vary based on several factors, including the actual depth of discharge 

allowed by the vehicle manufacturer. For example, Transpower limits the battery SOC range of 

its electric truck batteries to improve the longevity. If the total energy used from batteries is 

limited to 80% of their capacity, they can cycle 2,000 to 3,000 times, but if they are limited to 

70% of their total energy, they can cycle 5,000 times.39 Operators can also improve battery life 

by maintaining a battery SOC closer to the middle of its range, rather than fully charging or fully 

discharging. SMC could consider minimizing battery depletion by operating BEBs along shorter 

routes on days when air conditioning loads are expected to peak or on particularly wet days when 

 

39 Transpower USA. Electric Class 8 Truck Product Description. 2014. 

http://www.transpowerusa.com/downloads/Electric-Class-8-Truck-Description-TransPower-08-08-14.pdf. 

[Accessed: January 22, 2019].
35

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

road conditions may reduce efficiency. Using multiple BEBs along a longer route in adverse 

conditions could achieve the same purpose. 

Because of these considerations, battery lifetime represents a significant risk factor to the 

economic feasibility of converting the SMC transit fleet to BEBs. The cost of battery 

replacement is another major economic challenge. While electric vehicle battery pack costs in 

2017 were approximately $219/kWh (₹15,555/kWh) in the United States, the DOE goal for pack 

costs is $100/kWh (₹7,103/kWh) by 2022, and $75/kWh (₹5,327/kWh) in the long term.40

Assuming these goals are achieved in India, and batteries need to be replaced in 2022, they will 

cost less than half of what they currently cost. In addition, the government of India reduced the 

goods and services tax on lithium-ion batteries from 28% to 18% in July 2018, although the 

import duty was raised from 10% to 20%. This will reduce the pack costs for batteries produced 

in India, but the costs will remain the same for imported batteries.41

 

40 DOE Vehicle Technologies Office. 2018. Batteries: 2017 Annual Progress Report.

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/06/f52/Batteries_FY2017_APR_Final_FullReport-webopt.pdf. 

[Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 41 Rajeshwari. 2018. Mercom India. “GST on Li-Ion Batteries Reduced from 28 to 18 Percent”. 

https://mercomindia.com/gst-li-ion-batteries-reduced-from-28-to-18-percent/. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
36

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

6 Life-cycle Cost Comparison

The economic feasibility of BEBs depends on several factors, which can be summarized as a 

combination of capital expense (capex) and operating expense (opex). The capex includes 

purchase of the bus itself as well as charging equipment, while the variable opex consists mostly 

of fuel and maintenance costs. Insurance and accident costs are assumed to be equal for diesel 

and electric buses, and therefore are not factored into the life-cycle cost comparison. 

Furthermore, the analysis does not include the cost of diesel fueling stations; the authors 

assumed that the diesel infrastructure is already in place or the buses fuel at publicly available 

stations, whereas the electric charging equipment must be installed to support new BEBs. This 

section also assumes that BEBs would replace diesel buses at a ratio of one to one. However, to 

electrify routes with a longer range without on-route charging or battery swapping, Surat may 

need to acquire additional BEBs. 

6.1 Capital Expense

Capex for BEBs can be divided into bus purchase costs and installed EVSE costs. Both the 

vehicle and charging equipment costs for BEBs are subsidized by the FAME program. The 

proposed FAME II program was introduced in April 2019. Under the plan, BEBs qualify for 

incentives equaling ₹20,000/kWh up to 40% of the cost of the vehicle, and one slow charger per 

BEB or one fast charger for every ten BEBs will be funded through the grant program.

42 The 

following calculations are based on the FAME II proposal, assuming that it is formalized in its 

current form. 

6.1.1 Bus Costs

The Department of Heavy Industry (DHI) committee that oversees the FAME program set 

FAME I incentive amounts for BEBs based on benchmark prices using the lowest bid among 

nine cities for each bus category.43 Bus categories were based on bus length, seating capacity, 

battery capacity, and floor height. This report uses those categories and prices as an 

approximation of prices that Surat could secure in its bid for BEBs. However, actual costs may 

differ.

To highlight the wide range of potential BEB purchase costs, Figure 24 and Figure 25 show the 

submitted bid prices for BEBs from seven OEMs to solicitations from municipal corporations in 

10 Indian cities.

44 Some cities requested gross cost contract (GCC) bids, which include opex, and 

others requested outright purchase contracts. Therefore, the charts are divided into GCCs

(INR/km) and outright purchase bids (INR Million), and cover 9-meter and 12-meter BEBs 

 

42 Government of India, DHI. 2019. Operational Guidelines for Delivery of Demand Incentive under FAME India 

Scheme: Phase - II - regarding. https://dhi.nic.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/DHI%20FAME%20PHASEII22March2019.pdf. [Accessed April 8, 2019]. 43 Government of India, DHI. 2018. Recommendations of the Committee Constituted to Decide Benchmark Price for 

Electric Buses to be Procured by Different STUs, for Release of Demand Incentives. 

https://dhi.nic.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/Benchmark%20price%20for%20Electric%20Buses63666299596397561

6.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 44 UITP. 2018. Electric Buses Procurement in India - Indian Cities Got the Viable Rates. 

https://india.uitp.org/sites/default/files/documents/Procurement%20of%20Electric%20buses%20in%20India%20-

%2020032018.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
37

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

either with or without air conditioning (AC or non-AC). The life-cycle cost comparison in this 

report uses the benchmark outright purchase figures with adjustments for electricity prices 

available in Surat and additional assumptions regarding charging equipment. The life-cycle costs 

over seven years for BEBs calculated in this report amount to between ₹26/km and ₹40/km, 

placing the report estimates on the low end of the range shown in Figure 24. There is 

significantly more variation within the submitted bids for GCCs, which might include accident 

and insurance costs.

Figure 23. Quoted rates for electric buses - gross cost contract (GCC)
38

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 24. Quoted rates for electric buses - outright purchase

Table 10 compares the original purchase cost and the cost after FAME II incentives for 

benchmark BEBs and two diesel buses sold in India.45 As additional points of reference, a report 

from the Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory includes production cost estimates of 

approximately ₹2M for 9-meter diesel buses, ₹6M for 12-meter diesel buses, ₹5M for 9-meter 

BEBs, and ₹10M for 12-meter BEBs.46

Table 9. Bus Purchase Costs Before and After FAME Incentives

Manufacturer Fuel 

Type

Length

(m)

Passenger 

Capacity

Battery 

Capacity

(kWh)

Purchase 

Cost

FAME II

Incentive

Cost After 

FAME II 

Incentive

Tata Electric 9 31 125 ₹7,490,000 ₹2,500,000 ₹4,990,000

Tata Electric 12 40 125 ₹8,800,000 ₹2,500,000 ₹6,300,000

BYD Electric 9 31 162 ₹12,297,600 ₹3,240,000 ₹9,057.600

BYD Electric 12 40 324 ₹17,519,400 ₹6,480,000 ₹11,039,400

Tata Diesel 12 44 - ₹3,300,000 ₹ - ₹3,300,000

Volvo Diesel 12 32 - ₹8,800,000 ₹ - ₹8,800,000

 

45 Global Green Growth Institute and Center for Study of Science, Technology, and Policy. 2015. Electric Buses in 

India: Technology, Policy and Benefits.

http://www.cstep.in/uploads/default/files/publications/stuff/CSTEP_Electric_Buses_in_India_Report_2016.pdf. 

[Accessed: January 17, 2019].

46 Khandekar, et. al. 2018. The Case for All New City Buses in India to be Electric. http://etapublications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/india_electric_city_buses.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
39

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

While the purchase costs of BEBs are higher than those of the diesel buses, after accounting for 

FAME incentives they are more competitive. 

6.1.2 EVSE Costs and Considerations

The FAME II program proposes to provide grants for up to 100% of the cost of one slow charger

per BEB and one fast charger for every ten BEBs.

47 Slow and fast EVSE were not defined in the 

DHI notification; the authors assumed that a unit capable of charging a BEB overnight would be 

considered slow in the context of FAME II, and an on-route charger would be considered fast.

Assuming the Surat BRTS qualifies for the 100% EVSE project cost incentive, there will be no 

cost associated with EVSE. This differs significantly from the FAME I program, which offered 

10% of the bus costs as an incentive for EVSE.

There are multiple depot-charge or on-route charge strategies that Surat could employ. If SMC 

elects to purchase a depot-charge bus, it could rotate high-power direct current fast charger 

(DCFC) ports overnight among multiple BEBs or install a slower, dedicated EVSE port to each 

vehicle. Alternatively, SMC could acquire a BEB with on-route ultra-fast charging (typically 

employing an automatic conductive coupler such as a pantograph or wireless charging pads) or 

swappable batteries. The types of charging are illustrated in Figure 25.

(a) (b) (c)

None of the BEBs identified in this report as available in India currently offer on-route charging 

options. However, Ashok Leyland offers a BEB with swappable batteries that could function in a 

fashion similar to that of on-route ultra-fast-charging, with designated locations along a bus route 

to swap the depleted batteries with fully charged batteries. This minimizes the wait time for bus 

operators, but it requires designated locations for BEB battery exchange. The company operating 

the swapping would then use one of the strategies outlined in Figure 25 to charge the depleted 

batteries. Costs for battery swapping in India were not available publicly, but the GCC bids in 

Bangalore and Ahmedabad might include those costs (Figure 24).

As an example of a depot-charge option, BYD buses can charge using the GB/T standard DCFCs

or IEC 62196 Type 2 alternating current (AC) connectors.48 GB/T DCFC currently can provide 

 

47 Government of India, DHI. Notification: Scheme for Fast Adoption and Manufacturing of Electric Vehicles in 

India Phase II(FAME India Phase II). https://www.fame-india.gov.in/WriteReadData/userfiles/file/FAMEII%20Notification.pdf

48 Song, N. BYD Auto Asia-Pacific Auto Sales Division. 2018. “Personal Communication with Author.”.

Figure 25. EVSE connection types

(a) handheld conductive (b) automatic conductive (c) automatic wireless
40

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

up to 237.5 kW of charging power,

49 although 150-kW chargers appear more common on 

clearinghouse sites such as Alibaba. Type 2 AC EVSE can charge at up to 43 kW on 63A threephase power (415 V). In order to provide up to 324 kWh between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.

(which would fully charge the battery of a BYD 12-meter BEB overnight), the EVSE must 

provide 52 kW of continuous power (assuming 10% efficiency loss from the EVSE to battery).

Although the batteries are unlikely to be fully depleted every day, EVSE units do not always 

provide the maximum rated power listed by the manufacturer, especially as ESS capacity 

approaches 100%. Therefore, Surat may want to consider a 60 kW DCFC. 

In case SMC does not qualify for the full EVSE project costs, an approximation of unit and 

installation costs may prove useful. The authors could not ascertain cost data on EVSE units sold

in India, and installation expenses depend heavily on power availability, electrical upgrades, and 

surface disruptions such as trenching through concrete. In a 2015 report on nonresidential U.S. 

EVSE costs, the DOE estimated 24–90 kW DCFC unit costs between ₹710,000 – ₹2,800,000

and average installation costs of about ₹149,000.50 Assuming an average unit purchase price of 

₹178,000 for a 60 kW charger in addition to the installation cost, unsubsidized EVSE would cost

₹3,270,000. SMC may be able to achieve lower costs by installing Type 2 AC EVSE if 43 kW is 

sufficient and the BEBs can accept 43 kW AC, or by installing 150 kW DCFC and rotating 

charging among three buses overnight. However, rotating the charging cords or moving the

buses throughout the night would increase labor costs. Detailed electrical and labor assessments 

at the depots would be necessary to determine the optimal charging strategy.

It is unclear whether the FAME II definition of EVSE project costs will include upgrades to the 

distribution transformer. Therefore, SVNIT Surat analyzed the costs of installing a distribution 

transformer to provide apparent power at up to 800 kVA (standard transformer size with more 

than enough capacity for 10 BEBs charging at 60 kW) or 1,250 kVA (more than enough capacity 

for charging 15 buses at 60 kW or 10 BEBs at 100 kW). While the transformers are specified at 

standard sizes, the analysis used 600 kVA and 1,000 kVA respectively for setup charges because 

they more accurately reflect likely power requirements for 10 or 15 BEBs at 60 kW. As shown in 

Table 11, the expected charges from the utility include a refundable security deposit, which 

accounts for over 75% of the total charges. 

 

49 Kane. 2018. “China is Developing New GB/T Fast Charging Standard at 900 kW.” Inside EVs. 

https://insideevs.com/china-new-gb-t-fast-charging-standard-900-kw/. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 50 DOE. 2015. Costs Associated with Non-Residential Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment: Factors to consider in the

implementation of electric vehicle charging stations.

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/uploads/publication/evse_cost_report_2015.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
41

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 10. Utility Setup Charges for 600 and 1,000 kVA Transformers

Setup Charges 600 kVA 1000 kVA

Registration Charges ₹6,000 ₹10,000

Service Connection Charges ₹10,400 ₹16,000

Pro Rata Charges ₹690,000 ₹1,150,000

Security Deposit (refundable) ₹3,294,000 ₹5,553,000

Line Charges (approximate) ₹350,000 ₹350,000

Total ₹4,350,400 ₹7,079,000

In addition, there would be costs associated with installing the distribution transformer. SVNIT 

estimates that the total costs associated with an 800-kVA transformer would be ₹2,730,000, 

while a 1,250-kVA transformer would cost ₹3,320,000.

Table 11. Distribution Transformer Costs

Equipment Type 800 kVA 1250 kVA

BIS 1180 Level, 2 (11/433), 

OLTE Tap, ONAN, Copper 

Wound

₹1,280,000 ₹1,570,000 

11 kVA Switchyard ₹325,000 ₹325,000 

1250 A VCB and High-Tension 

Cable

₹325,000 ₹325,000 

LT Main PCC Panel with APFC 

Panel (approximate)

₹550,000 ₹750,000 

Cabling and Other Accessories ₹250,000 ₹350,000 

Total ₹2,730,000 ₹3,320,000 

SVNIT diagrammed the installation of the high-tension (HT) vacuum circuit breaker (VCB), 

transformer, low-tension (LT) bus, and LT panel with automatic power factor control (APFC) as 

shown in Figure 26. 

Figure 26. Single line diagram of electrical upgrades to support BEBs
42

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Sufficient detail was not available to isolate electrical upgrades within the overall installation 

cost estimates provided in the DOE 2015 cost report.51 However, the total costs associated with 

electrical upgrades, including the charges for new service and the security deposit, total 

₹7,080,400 for ten 60-kW EVSE, or ₹708,040 per unit. Excluding the security deposit—which 

can be refunded as a bill credit—the total would be ₹3,786,400. This is approximately one 

quarter of the ₹1,491,609 estimated for overall EVSE installation costs. It is likely that the 

balance of installation costs—such as trenching, pouring a concrete pad, and configuring the 

EVSE—would not equal three times the cost of the electrical upgrades, suggesting that the DOE

installation cost estimates for the United States are higher than SMC's costs would be. 

As noted above, the FAME II program proposal includes a provision to pay for 100% of the cost 

of EVSE. Therefore, it is likely that all of the EVSE costs for the Surat BEBs will be reimbursed. 

However, they could be as high as 15 lakh per EVSE without incentives.

6.2 Operational Costs

The two primary opex factors assessed in this report are fuel and maintenance. BEBs are 

significantly more efficient than diesel buses on the basis of energy content. Combined with low 

electricity costs in Surat, fuel costs for BEBs are far less than those for diesel buses. However, 

the maintenance cost comparisons are not as clear.

6.2.1 Fuel Costs

BEBs achieve significantly higher fuel efficiency than conventional diesel buses—modeled at 

approximately two to five times higher in this report (see Figure 17 for estimates along Surat 

BRTS routes). NREL performed an analysis to estimate the costs for depot-charging BEBs based

on available tariff schedules from Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company (DGVCL).

52 The HTP-1 tariff 

was applied for high-tension electricity supply above 100 kVA. This tariff includes energy 

(consumption) charges, demand changes, a power factor adjustment, and time-of-use rebates. For 

power availability between 500 and 1,000 kVA, the energy charge is ₹4.2/kWh. The demand 

charge for 612 kVA (10 x 60 kW EVSE units with a 98% power factor) is ₹104,184 per month. 

SMC should be able to take advantage of adjustments for maintaining power factor above 95% 

(₹0.0006/kWh for 98% power factor), as well as time-of-use rate rebates (₹0.40/kWh for 

charging between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.). In total, monthly energy costs for charging 10 

BEBs at 293 kWh/night (which includes a 10% efficiency loss) would be ₹438,650. For a BEB 

fuel efficiency of 1.12 kWh/km (16,000 kg at 28° C, Table 8), this equates to ₹6.20/km. At lower 

tension (<100 kVA, for 1–2 EVSE only), the rate for EV charging is simply ₹4.1/kWh, which 

equates to ₹4.59/km using the same efficiency.

 

51 DOE 2015. Costs Associated with Non-Residential Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment: Factors to consider in the

implementation of electric vehicle charging stations.

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/uploads/publication/evse_cost_report_2015.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].

52 Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited. 2018. Truing up for FY 2016-17 and Determination of Tariff for FY 

2018-19. http://www.gercin.org/uploaded/document/3667c615-84ea-44ff-9eb7-ee58fe742fd5.pdf. [Accessed:

October 20, 2018].
43

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

The diesel fuel prices reported by SMC were ₹74.30/liter. As shown in Table 13, for a fuel 

efficiency of 3.50 km/liter, this results in fuel costs of ₹21.23/km; for 2.20 km/liter, fuel costs 

would be ₹33.77/km.

Table 12. Fuel Cost Per Bus

Bus

Fuel Price 

(INR/energy 

unit)

Fuel Efficiency 

(km/energy 

unit)

Charging 

Efficiency

Fuel Cost 

(INR/km)

Tata 9m 125 kWh Electric ₹5.73 1.45 0.90 ₹4.38 

Tata 12m 125 kWh Electric ₹5.17 1.04 0.90 ₹5.55 

BYD 9m 165 kWh Electric ₹5.38 1.19 0.90 ₹5.02 

BYD 12m 324 kWh Electric ₹4.98 0.89 0.90 ₹6.20 

Tata 12m Diesel ₹74.30 3.50 N/A ₹21.23

Volvo 12m Diesel ₹74.30 2.20 N/A ₹33.77

6.2.2 Maintenance Costs

Available data on BEB maintenance costs in India are limited because few BEBs had been 

deployed in the country as of 2018. However, NREL completed three U.S. BEB evaluations 

from 2017 to 2018, including maintenance cost comparisons between electric and conventional 

(diesel and CNG) buses.53,54,55 In the reference reports, NREL standardizes labor rates at 

$50/hour (or ₹3,551/hour) to estimate maintenance costs. For this economic analysis, the authors 

converted the labor rates based on relative average wages between India and the United States to 

₹299/hour.56 Parts costs were assumed to remain the same in either country. Although the actual 

bus manufacturing and labor rates may be different, these results provide a levelized approach 

for comparison and constitute the best data available. The sample size is limited to 21 BEBs and 

10 diesel buses.

Many of the buses studied by NREL were under warranty for the duration of the evaluations. In 

these cases, NREL has no insight into the cost of work performed by the warrantors. One 

exception is the 2014 Proterra 35-foot Catalyst bus, which concluded the warranty period during 

the bus evaluation and carried significantly higher overall maintenance costs and propulsionspecific costs (three to six times higher) than any other set of buses analyzed. This evaluation 

may be indicative of BEB maintenance costs in the period immediately following warranty,

when bus operator technicians are learning to troubleshoot electric propulsion system problems. 

 

53 Eudy, Jeffers. 2018. Foothill Transit Agency Battery Electric Bus Progress Report. 

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/72207.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 54 Eudy, Jeffers. 2018. Zero-Emission Bus Evaluation Results: King County Metro Battery Electric Buses. 

https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/115086/zero-emission-bus-evaluationresults-king-county-metro-battery-electric-buses-fta-report-no-0118.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 55 Eudy, Jeffers. 2018. Zero-Emission Bus Evaluation Results: County Connection Battery Electric Buses. 

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/72864.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019]. 56 Nation Master. "Country vs. Country: India and United States Compared: Labor Stats." 

https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/India/United-States/Labor. [Accessed January 30, 2019].
44

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

However, these buses also suffered from low-voltage battery failures due to accessories such as 

fareboxes and cameras drawing power continuously from batteries instead of switching off.

Excluding the set of 35-ft Proterra BEBs would yield BEB total maintenance costs of ₹3.02/km, 

considerably less than the total maintenance costs of ₹11.76/km with those particular BEBs 

included. This difference when excluding the outlier is enough to impact the overall life-cycle

cost comparison between BEBs and diesel buses. Table 14 provides a summary of maintenance 

costs (converted to INR/km) from the U.S. BEB evaluations.

Table 13. Maintenance Costs for Electric and Diesel Buses from NREL Evaluations

Bus Fuel 

Type

Total Maintenance 

(INR/km)

Propulsion System 

Maintenance (INR/km)

Number 

of 

Buses

Gillig 29 ft BAE Systems 2016 Electric ₹3.86 ₹1.56 4

Proterra 35 ft Catalyst 2014 Electric ₹18.32 ₹8.65 12

Proterra 40 ft Catalyst 2016 Electric ₹2.98 ₹1.56 2

Proterra 40 ft Catalyst 2015 Electric ₹1.92 ₹0.23 3

Gillig 40 ft Cummins ISL 2015 Diesel ₹5.18 ₹2.26 3

Gillig 29 ft Cummins ISL-9 2014 Diesel ₹7.77 ₹3.09 7

Weighted Average Electric ₹11.76 ₹5.42 21

Weighted Average Diesel ₹7.00 ₹2.84 10

The weighted average of maintenance costs across the evaluations are similar between electric 

and diesel buses, but there is significant deviation within each category. In addition to the 

limitations described above, these costs do not account for battery replacements that may be 

necessary as the electric buses age, or diesel engine rebuilds that are typical at the midlife point 

of these buses in the United States.

6.2.3 Life-cycle Operating Costs

Total operational costs are based on the fuel costs shown in Table 12 and the weighted average 

maintenance costs shown in Table 13. Average daily driving distance was based on a weighted 

average of BRTS route distance (distance of each route multiplied by the number of buses 

assigned to each route per SMC). This equated to 236 km/day. NREL assumed that both diesel 

and electric buses were available 85% of the time based on U.S. industry standards and that they 

would operate for at least seven years based on recent proposed contract periods by other major 

Indian cities.

57 Table 15 shows the inputs for and results of these calculations.

 

57 UTIP. 2018. “Electric Buses Procurement in India -Indian Cities Got the Variable Rates.”

https://india.uitp.org/sites/default/files/documents/Procurement%20of%20Electric%20buses%20in%20India%20-

%2020032018.pdf. [Accessed: January 17, 2019].
45

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 14. Life-cycle Operating Costs

Bus

Fuel 

Cost 

(INR/km)

Maintenance

Cost

(INR/km)

Daily Travel 

Distance 

(km/day)

Daily 

Operating 

Cost

Availability

Years of 

Operation

Lifetime 

Operating 

Cost

Tata 9m 

125 kWh 

Electric

₹4.38 ₹11.76 236 ₹3,806 85% 7 ₹8,264,729 

Tata 12m 

125 kWh 

Electric

₹5.55 ₹11.76 236 ₹4,081 85% 7 ₹8,863,977 

BYD 9m 

162 kWh 

Electric

₹5.02 ₹11.76 236 ₹3,958 85% 7 ₹8,594,739 

BYD 12m 

324 kWh 

Electric

₹6.20 ₹11.76 236 ₹4,235 85% 7 ₹9,198,202 

Tata 12m 

Diesel ₹21.23 ₹7.00 236 ₹6,655 85% 7 ₹14,453,775

Volvo 12m 

Diesel ₹33.77 ₹7.00 236 ₹9,613 85% 7 ₹20,877,633

6.3 Total Cost of Ownership

Total cost of ownership is calculated by summing all of the inputs described in sections 6.1 and 

6.2 As noted earlier, NREL did not attempt to calculate insurance or accident costs under the 

assumption that they would not differ between diesel and electric buses. The analysis does not 

account for the benefits from reduced emissions or local economic impacts. 

Figure 27 shows the total cost of ownership of each bus examined in Section 6. In most cases, 

the BEBs are less expensive to own and operate than the diesel buses over seven years, although 

the larger battery size of the most expensive BEB may be necessary to support Surat BRTS 

routes. This is largely a function of the lower fuel cost per km for BEBs, as well as of the 

incentives provided under the FAME program. The total estimated cost of ownership for the 

BYD 324 kWh BEB is ₹20,237,602, while the Tata Starbus diesel bus is ₹17,753,775. However, 

if the maintenance costs are more in line with the BEBs under warranty in NREL's U.S. reports 

(see Section 6.2.2), the 324 kWh BEB life-cycle cost drops to ₹15,761,821.
46

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 27. Total estimated cost of ownership
47

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

7 Conclusion

Bus electrification promises improved efficiency and reduced operating costs for the Surat 

BRTS, but there are several considerations to make before deploying BEBs along all BRTS

routes. As described in Section 4.2, the NREL model predicts vehicle efficiency to vary 

significantly depending on vehicle mass and ambient temperature, among other factors. SMC 

should carefully weigh factors affecting battery degradation when sizing ESS capacity, planning 

BEB operations, and negotiating warranties.

Available BEB options appear to allow SMC to begin electrification of the BRTS fleet with 

favorable results. Assuming an efficiency of 1.08 kWh/km or better, depot-charge BEBs with 

ESS capacity of 250 kWh or greater could replace conventional buses for half of the BRTS 

routes. Factoring in 20% battery degradation before replacement, the initial ESS requirement for 

those buses would be at least 312.5 kWh of usable capacity. On particularly hot or wet days, 

BEB efficiency will be reduced.

With an ESS of that size, BEB costs are comparable to diesel buses available in India. 

Depending on whether the estimates include outlier maintenance costs for a limited sample size 

of U.S buses past the warranty period, a 324 kWh BEB could cost 14% more or 11% less than 

the more affordable diesel bus considered (see Section 6.2.2 for details).

The FAME II program proposes to cover the entire EVSE cost of one slow charger per BEB or 

one fast charger per 10 BEBs. Although it appears that EVSE installation costs will be covered 

by these incentives, Section 6.1.2 includes cost considerations for depot-charging EVSE.

On-route charging is not currently available for the BEBs identified in this report, and therefore 

was not yet analyzed with respect to BRTS bus service, but this charging strategy could be an

effective way to reduce BEB battery size. On-route fast-charging BEBs with smaller battery 

packs may prove to be a more suitable option than that of extended-range depot-charging BEBs 

for the longest BRTS routes. This should be investigated as manufacturers in India begin 

offering the technology. Important considerations for on-route strategies include access to land 

and power supply, electrical demand charges incurred by high-power fast chargers, planning for 

layover time at charging stations, and battery lifetime impacts of high-powered charging. Battery 

replacement and vehicle maintenance warranties are important considerations regardless of 

charging strategy. 

SMC would benefit from a small deployment of BEBs to validate the operational model and 

financial projections against actual conditions in Surat. This would minimize Surat's risk 

exposure and allow SMC to work through technical challenges. A strategy employed in the 

United States is to purchase a specified number of BEBs pending a short-term test trial of one to 

five buses. This could involve shadowing a diesel bus operation along actual routes with a 

dummy payload and auxiliary loads operating to simulate real service. The test trial could 

measure performance in hot, cold, dry, and wet conditions. A long-term trial will be necessary to 

understand maintenance costs, and validating propulsion battery lifetime in-situ will take several 

years. 

Securing a favorable warranty from the manufacturer for the bus and battery can shift some of 

the maintenance risk to the OEM, reducing barriers for early adopters of the technology and 
48

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

further encouraging other municipal corporations to deploy BEBs. An in-service evaluation to 

compare diesel and electric buses once deployed would provide a more comprehensive 

understanding of the performance and cost differences between the two technologies.

58

BEBs hold great promise for improving fleet efficiency and reducing operational costs. This 

report illustrates that several Surat BRTS routes could begin operating BEBs currently available 

in India. Subsequent analysis of those buses in operation can refine ESS capacity estimates for 

longer routes and extreme weather as well as determine how much money Surat could save 

through bus electrification in the long term. As SMC begins realizing benefits, Surat bus 

operators will gain valuable experience, and the lessons learned can inform the adoption of BEBs 

throughout India and the world.

 

58 A description of this type of evaluation and several example reports are available at 

https://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/fuel-cell-bus-evaluation.html.
49

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Appendix A. BRTS Maps by Route Number

11 12

14 15

16 17
50

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

17e 18