4.7 Article

Public charging infrastructure for plug-in electric vehicles: What is it worth?

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2019.11.011

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-AC36-08G028308]
  2. California Energy Commission (CEC)'s Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (ARFVTP)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lack of charging infrastructure is an important barrier to the growth of the plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) market. Public charging infrastructure has tangible and intangible value, such as reducing range anxiety or building confidence in the future of the PEV market. Quantifying the value of public charging infrastructure can inform analysis of investment decisions and can help predict the impact of charging infrastructure on future PEV sales. Estimates of willingness to pay (WTP) based on stated preference surveys are limited by consumers' lack of familiarity with PEVs. As an alternative, we focus on quantifying the tangible value of public PEV chargers in terms of their ability to displace gasoline use for PHEVs and to enable additional electric (e - ) vehicle miles for BEVs, thereby mitigating the limitations of shorter range and longer recharging time. Simulation studies provide data that can be used to quantify e-miles enabled by public chargers and the value of additional e-miles can be inferred from econometric estimates of WTP for increased vehicle range. Functions are synthesized that estimate the WTP for public charging infrastructure by plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles, conditional on vehicle range, annual vehicle travel, pre-existing charging infrastructure, energy prices, vehicle efficiency, and household income. A case study based on California's public charging network in 2017 indicates that, to the purchaser of a new BEV with a 100-mile range and home recharging, existing public fast chargers are worth about $1500 for intraregional travel, and fast chargers along intercity routes are valued at over $6500.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据