Analysis of effects of plugAnalysis of effects of plug-invehicles on electricity demandA li i l iApreliminary analysisnary ana1Photo illustration by George Lange, with Michael Miller(Plug) –Popular MechanicsPotential Impact ofPlug-in Electric Vehiclesin Electric VehiclesState of transportation for passengerStateoftransportationforpassengerand light trucks past 30 years.Potential impact of Plug-in HybridPotentialimpactofPluginHybridvehiclesPotential impact of Vehicle to GridPotentialimpactofVehicletoGrid2We have two modes:Wehavetwomodes:”Complacency and Panic”James Schlesinger3Crited sDr. AnupBandivadekar MIT “EvaluatingthegImpact of Advanced Vehicle and Fueltechnologies in U.S. Light-duty VehicleFl “eetMichael Kinter-Meyer, Kevin Schneider andRobert Pratt from Pacific NorthwestNational Lab Impacts Assessment of PlugNationalLab.ImpactsAssessmentofPlugin Hybrid Vehicles on Electric Utilities andregional U S Power Grid4regionalU.S.PowerGrid.Backgroundg ou dAbout 230 million passenger vehiclesAbout230millionpassengervehiclesand light trucks on the roads today.Vehicles per 1000 peopleVehiclesper1000peopleUS ~ 800 per thousandWestern Europe/Canada600WesternEurope/Canada-China- 20MPG i l 20MPG~inlow20s5Changesin Transportationa ges a spo a oUS totals 1970 2005Number of Vehicles (millions)110235NumberofVehicles(millions)Miles traveled (Trillion) 1.1 2.9Miles per vehicle10 30312 482Milespervehicle,,67,AdjustedfuellEcol1oJmy.bY'Model(AnDlota,30..,.......-------------------,,"1.51[0+-r-T""T""T"""I""T""T""'Ir-r-T-T""T""T'"r+T-"T""T""T'+-rT"T""T""i"'T""T""'l--r+-1I'""T""T""r-+-T"T""T""T""'I1910.[1'9,9019851990199[512000200.[52010NorthwestPowerand;Conservation;iii'Council845004QOO300W1eiglltandPerformance(,Annuall]Da,fa)hIL.',eig'h19901NorthwestPowerand;Conservation;iii'Council94!lO:,.SaesIIFlI!"actito nbyV,ee.ype(ThreeYeall!"Movi n gAveIrage):Salesrrac1iio1--oE-Cal".......-..___.-l/l$ii]]g;onLIIiIl.......NorthwestPowerand;Conservation;iii'CouncilTrends in Cost of Transport10Fgure10.ojRea}DISposableIncome,Vehlcle-Mtles'D'tn'Jed,COl1SWllQrPriceInde_(CPI-U,andRealAverag,eReailGasolinePrice;19-004.198-=10'0I{)...iii)a;0...........CD('II(I) (I) (I)(I)CDCD,.. ,.........Q)Q),.. ,..ReallLlisposablePersonalIncome-e-RealMotorGo'linPriceforAllGrd.ATraveledCPI·U:Allitem-le--foodanden-rgy•t')...in<Q""i:OQ)b,N MinID...CDCDCDCDCDcocoQ)0)en0)(I)(I)01(I)(I)CIlQ)(I)G'> G'>(I)(I)CIl01·(I)(I),..,..,.. ,......,..,..Q) Q),..,.. ,.....,..,..,.. ,..iii)Q)0NI"')-Q)Q)0000,Q)(I)0Q0Q,..,..QNNN(\oj·R,-tnV00..BllrU 02cOllomIeAllal).IiI_NorthwestPowerand;Conservation;iii'Council11'1412I'109.49,0-.-I8I1642019691977198,310.611.61990199512.1001NorthwestPowerand;Conservation;iii'CouncilTravel Time to Work60%70%50%

t30%40%

Percen10%20%0%Less than 30 minutes Between 30 Minutes to an 1hourOver an hour12Typical US Commute Distance35%30%We assumed 33 miles round trip for our modeling work20%25%

m utersWeassumed33milesroundtripforourmodelingwork15%20%

e rcent of Com m5%10%

P e0%1-1011-2021-3031-4041-5051-6061-70>70131 1011 2021 3031 4041 5051 6061 70>70Round Trip Miles TraveledDescriptionofdifferentoptionsp o o d e e op o sCurrent optionsGasoline systemTurbo DieselhybridFuture optionsGasolineAudi Turbo DieselGM VoltTurbo DieselHybridplugin hybrid-inhybridBattery electricFuel CellHyundai’s Fuel CellTesla’s Batteryelectric car14Barriers to new alternative fueled vehiclesDemandHigh first cost for vehicleFuel storage/limited rangeFuelstorage/limitedrangeReliability and durabilityLack of refueling infustructureLackofrefuelinginfustructureMarket entry barriers (high entry cost)High discount factors and risk aversionHighdiscountfactorsandriskaversion15Barriers to new alternative fueled vehiclesSupply side constraintsSupplysideconstraintsLead times for new product lineHigh Capital investment requirementsHighCapitalinvestmentrequirementsLimitations of critical supplycomponentsGlobal market response / increase inprice of components/ backlogp g16Simple“ What If ” modelt If ” mp e a odeForecast of passenger and light trucks –Global InsightMarket share fraction ~ 3% to start 26% in 10 yearsMarketsharefraction~3%tostart26%in10yearsMiles traveled per day ~33 held constantEnergy requirement ~ 0.26-0.46 KWh/mile (0.3 midsize)Energy efficiency improvement -5% per yearBattery size 10 KWhAvailable batteryte Lithium-IonypT&D and conversion efficiency losses ~20%Recharge at 110 v 15 amp in 8 hoursRecharge at 220 v 30 amp in under 2 hoursRechargeat220v30ampinunder2hoursAssumed 95% recharge off peak, 5% during peak hoursCurrent average MPG for gasoline vehicles 20.217CO2 emissions for gasoline ~ 1 lb/mile2000-2030 New Passenger and Light Trucks400450300350OrWA150200250

1000sIDMT501001500 2 0 00 2 0 01 2003 20 0 4 2 0 06 2007 20 0 9 20 10 2 0 12 2013 20 1 5 2 0 16 2018 20 1 9 20 2 1 2 0 22 2024 20 2 5 2 0 27 2028 203018Market Share Scenarios60%70%50%

ars30%40%

P ercent of New cSlower startBaseAggressive10%20%

P0% 20 10 20 11 20 1 2 20 1 3 20 1 4

2 0 1 5 2 0 16 2 0 17 2 0 18 20 19 20 20 20 2 1 20 2 2 2 0 2 3 2 0 24 2 0 25 2 0 26 2 0 27 20 28 20 2 9 20 3 019

20 20 20 20 20 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 20 20 20 20 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 20 20 20Plug-in Vehicles on the Road (1000s)5000600048% ofnew4000vehiclepurchases2010-2030300020%-24%of newvehicle10002000purchases2010-203001000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0Slower startBaseAggressive20

201 0 201 1 201 2 201 3 201 4 201 5 201 6 201 7 201 8 20 1 9 2 02 0 202 1 202 2 202 3 202 4 202 5 202 6 202 7 202 8 202 9 203 0Assumed Daily Recharge ScheduleAssumedDailyRechargeScheduleAssumedRechargeSchedule90%100%70%80%40%50%60%20%30%0%10%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2421Impact on Northwest Energy MWa1 2001,0001,2003% of load800

aSlower startBaseAggressive400600

MW a1.3-1.6% ofload200- 2010 201 2 2 014 2016 2018 2020 2022 202 4 20 26 2 028 203022Impact on Off Peak Hour Loads (MW)2 0002,5001,5002,00010% ofoffpeakload1,000

MW4-5% ofoff500Slower startBasepeakload- 2 010 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 2 015 2 016 2 017 2 01 8 2 019 2 02 0 2 021 2 0 22 2 023 2 024 2 025 2 026 2 027 2 028 2 029 2 030Aggressive23

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Impact on Peak Load6050Less than0.0007%40

WSlower startBaseofregionalpeak2030

M WAggressive10- 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 203024Reduction in CO2 Emissionsmetric tons18,000,000~37% ofregional CO212 000 00014,000,00016,000,000regionalCO2emission fromgasolineconsumption in20068,000,00010,000,00012,000,00018%15%4,000,0006,000,000Slower start-2,000,000 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0BaseAggressive25

20 1 0 20 1 2 20 1 4 20 1 6 201 8 20 2 0 20 2 2 20 2 4 20 2 6 20 2 8 20 3 0Impact of PlugImpact of Plug-in Hybridsin Hybridson the Power SystemInyear 2020Base Case without HybridsAnnual Average Mid-C price: $ 64.57/mwhA l CO2 E i i f l tAnnualCO2Emissionsfrom power plants:443.3 million tonsPlug-in Hybrid Electric CaseAnnual Average Mid-C price: $ 65.27/mwhAnnual CO2 Emissions from power plants:444.7 million tonsAverage price and CO2 emissions go up slightly.26MID-C Prices in 2020 $/mwh(nominal)70Base casePlug-ins recharged off peakPl i h d k5060Plug-in rechargedon peak30405020-10 

# Average price $/MWH Off peak price On peak price $/MWH27 

# $/MWHModeling Storage OpportunitiesVehicle 2 GridVehicle2GridFirst assumed that 25 MW of storage canbe placed in the Plug-in vehicles.Charge period: 11 pm-5 amDi h P i d 11 4DischargePeriod:11am to4pmAssumed efficiency: 80%I t P i d CO2 i iImpactonPrices andCO2emissions weremarginal.Then evaluated impact of a 250 MWThenevaluatedimpactofa250MWstorage unit.28Storage Charge and DischargeShapeDischarge2530Discharge Period101520‐5051 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24‐20‐15‐10RechargeRecharge‐30‐2520RechargePeriodRechargePeriod29Impact on Prices and CO2 EmissionsImpactonPricesandCO2EmissionsEmissionsStorageChargePeriodDischargeperiodBase case 52.3 70.75With plug-ins 53.7 70.96with plug-ins and V2G 54.3 69.94Power Plant CO2 Emissions (WECC wide)Base case - 443 million tonsWith Plug-ins - 444.7 million tonsWith Plug-in and V2G- 444.8 million tons30Optimizingalargerstorageunittimizing a a ge s o age uAssumed that 250 MW of storage can bel d i th li hi lplacedinthe plug-n vehiclesAllowed Aurora Model to optimize charginganddischargingd d sc a g gModel chose discharge periods in responseto higher market prices, to lower marketprice.Discharge Periods were early eveningwinter peak period and early afternoonsummer peak period.Finding: Similar impact to earlier analysis31Incorporating PlugIncorporating Plug-in Hybrids in Loadin Hybrids in LoadForecastPlug-in hybrid characteristics will beinhybridcharacteristicswillbeincorporated into Energy2020 modelPenetration rates can be exogenouslyPenetrationratescanbeexogenouslyset as a policy or endogenouslymodeled as a customer choicemodeledasacustomerchoice.32Summra yPlug-in hybrids could increase annualinhybridscouldincreaseannualelectricity use in the NW by 1-3%Plug-in hybrids could increaseoffinhybridscouldincreasepeak demand by 4-10%Plugin electrics increase CO2-inelectricsincreaseCO2emissions from power plants butsignificantly reduce emission fromsignificantlyreduceemissionfromtransport sector.33