4.5 Article

Optimization of Static and Dynamic Charging Infrastructure for Electric Buses

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 14, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en14123516

关键词

electric bus; transport network; charging infrastructure; static charging; dynamic charging; cost optimization

资金

  1. Ministry of Innovation and Technology NRDI Office
  2. Higher Education Excellence Program of the Ministry of Human Capacities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The adoption of electric buses in public transport requires careful planning for the bus fleet and charging infrastructure. A mathematical model was developed to support the deployment of charging infrastructure. The study found that static chargers are more favorable when the cost is lower and the charging power is three times greater than dynamic chargers of a certain length.
The adoption of electric buses in public transport requires careful planning for the bus fleet and charging infrastructure. A mathematical model of an urban bus service was developed to support the deployment of charging infrastructure. The novelty of the model is that it incorporates infrastructure elements for both static and dynamic charging technologies at the same time. The model supports the electrification of the bus lines without route and schedule adjustments. The volume of charged energy at charging units is considered as a variable in the objective function to determine the location of charging units at minimum cost. The model was verified by a case study based on actual bus service data. It was found that the use of static chargers is more favorable if the cost of a static charging unit is less than the cost of a dynamic charger with a length of 1600 m and the charging power of static chargers is three times greater than the charging power of dynamic chargers. The relationship between charging power and the length of the dynamic charging unit was analyzed. It was noted that the use of charging power higher than 162.5 kW at dynamic charging units is not necessary.

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

4.5
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