4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Optimal allocation of electric vehicle charging stations in a highway network: Part 1. Methodology and test application

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENERGY STORAGE
卷 27, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.est.2019.101102

关键词

Charging station; Location; Electric vehicles; Highway network

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gradual electrification is widely considered as a feasible strategy for reducing the oil dependency and CO2 emissions of road transportation. In chase of these aims increasing importance has been attributed to Electric Vehicles (EVs). Although the European Commission has strongly supported sustainable mobility initiatives in recent years, with the purpose of decarbonizing road transport and mitigating urban air pollution, results are below expectations. Among the initiatives that can be implemented the most important is certainly the use of electric vehicles on a large scale but it will be necessary, in parallel, to plan an appropriate system of infrastructures that will be able to support the expansion. In this paper a methodology to provide optimal locations of electric vehicle infrastructures in a highway network is proposed. The procedure can also be used to support the implementation of the DAFI (Directive on the Deployment of Alternative Fuels Infrastructure). The goal is to estimate the basic number of charging stations and determine their correct allocation on the road network by analyzing the supply and demand and considering the psychological component of the driver. In Part 1, the subject of this research article, a model is presented to detect how many charging infrastructures are required within the service areas and to identify their location. After the description of the solution algorithm, a test application is performed in order to assess model and technique. With the aim of analysing a high-level system, the model will be used, in Part 2 of the work, to calculate and distribute the charging point on the Italian case study.

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