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.

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

Infrastructure, Components and 

System Level Testing and 

Analysis of Electric Vehicles

Cooperative Research and 

Development Final Report

CRADA Number: CRD-09-353

NREL Technical Contact: Jeremy Neubauer

CRADA Report

NREL/TP-7A10-58030

May 2013
NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. 

Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of 

any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately 

owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, 

trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, 

or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors 

expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge

Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy

and its contractors, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062

phone: 865.576.8401

fax: 865.576.5728

email: mailto:reports@adonis.osti.gov

Available for sale to the public, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161

phone: 800.553.6847

fax: 703.605.6900

email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov

online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx

Cover Photos: (left to right) PIX 16416, PIX 17423, PIX 16560, PIX 17613, PIX 17436, PIX 17721

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post consumer waste. 
1 

Cooperative Research and Development Final Report

In accordance with Requirements set forth in Article XI.A(3) of the CRADA document, this document is 

the final CRADA report, including a list of Subject Inventions, to be forwarded to the Office of Science 

and Technical Information as part of the commitment to the public to demonstrate results of federally 

funded research.

CRADA Number: CRD-09-353

CRADA Title: Infrastructure, Components and System Level Testing and Analysis of 

Electric Vehicles

Parties to the Agreement: A Better Place

Joint Work Statement Funding Table showing DOE commitment: 

Estimated Costs NREL Shared Resources

Year 1 $ 300,000.00

Year 2 $ 300,000.00

Year 3 $ 300,000.00

TOTALS $ 900,000.00

Abstract of CRADA work: 

Battery technology is critical for the development of innovative electric vehicle networks, which can 

enhance transportation sustainability and reduce dependence on petroleum. This cooperative research 

proposed by Better Place and NREL will focus on predicting the life-cycle economics of batteries, 

characterizing battery technologies under various operating and usage conditions, and designing optimal 

usage profiles for battery recharging and use.

Summary of Research Results: 

We analyzed the economics of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) operated under a service plan where 

battery swapping is available to extend vehicle range. Our evaluation process followed four steps: (1) 

identifying drive patterns best suited to a battery swapping service plan, (2) modeling service usage 

statistics for the selected drive patterns, (3) calculating the cost of service plan options given these 

statistics, and (4) evaluating the economics of individual drivers under realistically priced service plans 

(SPs). For comparison, we have also calculated the total cost of ownership (TCO) of both a BEV75 and a 

conventional vehicle (CV) operated under a conventional direct-ownership (DO) scenario. A high fidelity 

battery degradation model has been employed throughout to forecast battery wear, its effect on vehicle 

range, and required battery replacements. Real world drive patterns from the Travel Choices Study (TCS) 

project have been utilized to support the calculation of realistic battery usage, the frequency of battery 

swapping events, and the fraction of achievable vehicle miles travelled (VMT). The cost of unachievable 

VMT has been accounted for based on the cost of popular car share programs, making our results most 

generally applicable to drivers without access to an alternative lower cost, range-unlimited mode of 

transportation (e.g. a second non-BEV car owned by or freely available to said driver). Further, a detailed 

accounting of the economics of a battery swapping service provider, including consideration of the 
2 

amount of required infrastructure, financing of capital expenditures, taxes, depreciation, etc., has been 

applied to calculate the fee charged to the consumer for battery swapping service plans.

As should be expected, we find that drive patterns with high annual VMT are generally best suited to 

range extension (e.g., battery-swapping) SPs. The range extension infrastructure utilization to be 

expected from such drive patterns varies considerably – primarily as a function of the range of the BEV, 

where shorter BEV ranges encourage a higher frequency of range extension events. For all vehicle 

ranges, however, the achievable utility factor is high when range extension infrastructure is adequately 

placed and up to four range extensions per day are allowed: spanning from a low of 85% at 50 miles to a 

high of 94% at 100 miles.

In calculating the monthly service fee of a battery-swapping SP, we find that the high level of capital 

expenditures involved in the service provider’s business model makes the cost of financing very 

important. The large capital costs are generally best attributed to the cost of batteries (as opposed to 

infrastructure, electricity, charge points, and other general and administrative costs). However, if the cost 

of individual battery swap spots approaches or exceeds the high end of our assumptions, and geographic 

and/or customer service requirements demand a high number of swap spot deployments per customer, 

infrastructure costs can compete with and even exceed those of batteries.

In applying the calculated service fee to individual driver economics where the cost of unachievable VMT 

is high, our simulations show that the economic efficiency of a battery swapping SP-BEV is often 

challenged by the cost of batteries, infrastructure, and financing. Under our assumed cost of gasoline, tax 

structure, and absence of purchase incentives, we find that these factors generally make the TCO of the 

SP-BEV more expensive than that of a DO-CV. Only when battery costs reach the DOE’s most 

aggressive target ($125/kWh) and infrastructure costs achieve our lowest assumed values do we see 

significant numbers of drive patterns benefiting economically over the CV option.

However, where the cost of unachievable VMT is high, we do find the SP-BEV to be a more costeffective approach to electrifying travel for a significant number of drive patterns than a DO-BEV75 

under a broad range of scenarios for the cost of batteries and infrastructure. There is also additional 

potential for service providers to improve the relative value of BEVs via multi-tiered fee and service 

strategies, optimal allocation and down-cycling of aged batteries, and revenue generation via vehicle-togrid services (which, we note, a service provider is well positioned to optimize).This, along with several 

assumptions and simplifications made in this analysis, encourage further study of battery-swapping 

service plans. Along with these aforementioned avenues for value improvement, such efforts must also 

address several aspects of batter-swapping SP business models that could detract value, including 

accounting for business start-up costs (that could be significant over a period of several years or more 

before generating any revenue), marketing, engineering, and management staff expenses, the increase in 

cost to the vehicle glider for a swappable battery, and increased infrastructure utilization due to the 

geographic and temporal distribution of subscriber battery-swapping needs and other unaccounted-for 

driver behavior (e.g., range anxiety). Further, the concurrence of both a high cost of unachievable VMT 

and high annual VMT, which may decrease the potential customer base, should be considered. And, 

finally, other elements that are more difficult to quantify economically – such as customer willingness to 

subscribe to a service contract for battery service while owning a vehicle without a battery, to increase 

stopping frequency on long travel days, etc. – must be addressed as well.

Subject Inventions Listing: N/A

Report Date: 09 April 2013 Responsible Technical Contact at Alliance/NREL: Jeremy Neubauer

This document contains NO confidential, protectable, or proprietary information.