Browsing by Subject "Electric vehicles"
Now showing 1 - 13 of 13
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access An Economic & Environmental Analysis of the JetBlue Airways Ground Support Vehicles: A Proposed Implementation of a Cleaner-Burning Fleet(2015-04-23) Lindenfeld, Sara; Tran, MichelleJetBlue Airways Corporation, a Fortune 500 company based in New York City, is an airline that services 87 destinations across the U.S., Caribbean, and Latin America. From 2010 to 2014, JetBlue has made its overall operations increasingly more energy efficient, resulting in an 8.3% decline in greenhouse gas emissions intensity ratio (metric tons CO2-eq per 1,000 revenue ton miles flown), which has also saved the company millions of dollars in operating costs. As JetBlue continues to enhance its efforts to couple sustainability with economic value, a logical next step was to evaluate JetBlue’s ground fleet for potential improvement. Our analysis focused on ground support operations at JetBlue’s Terminal 5 at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) in New York. Responsible for 13,800 metric tons of CO2-eq emissions, the function of ground support equipment (GSE) vehicles is to service the aircraft between flights. Our study included the three most used vehicle types—bag tug, belt loader, and push back tug—as they offered the largest opportunity for savings. Our study explored the economic and environmental opportunities associated with replacing current gasoline and diesel-powered GSE vehicles with electric vehicles, also called eGSE. This report first provides background on JetBlue Airways, its environmental impacts, and the airline’s sustainability program. It provides general emissions trends within the transportation sector before narrowing in on ground vehicles, where it details their specific function and describes emissions standards that apply to off-road GSE. The report then details the first step within our analysis in which we review JetBlue-provided GSE data, including a system-wide inventory and ground fuel expenditures dataset by airport. This report summarizes this data by describing the composition of JetBlue’s JFK ground vehicles by function, quantity, and energy inputs. We then consider energy reduction strategies for the GSE fleet by describing available alternative fuel sources and evaluating relevant efforts by other airlines and airports. The next stage of our analysis consisted of interviews with JetBlue employees and associated business partners and stakeholders, whose commentary and feedback have been integrated into the report. Data was also recorded on the ground at JFK to better understand the operation and retrieve accurate daily vehicle usage data. In the final stage of the analysis, all data was synthesized into a model that estimated how much gasoline or diesel the average bag tug, belt loader, and push back tug is using, as well as how much JetBlue spends per vehicle in powering it annually. Based off data from a GSE manufacturer, we calculated what the energy costs savings would be if all vehicles would run off of electricity instead of gasoline or diesel. Lastly, we modeled eight scenarios in which JetBlue would change a portion of their fleet to electric, and for each scenario the model projected fuel costs and emissions savings. Page | 2 Based on the incentives described in this report, we recommend the following for JetBlue’s GSE fleet at JFK: 1. Pursue push back electrification secondary to bag tug and belt loader 2. Launch pilot to test 1 charger, 2 belt loaders, and 1 bag tug at JFK 3. Apply for the FAA’s Voluntary Airport Low Emissions Program (VALE) funding 4. Set goal of 20% electric bag tugs and belt loaders in 3-year period (by 2019), replacing vehicles as they retire. In a worst case scenario where JetBlue receives no funding and pays the higher cost for all new vehicles instead of refurbished, JetBlue will save roughly $1.7 million and 36,500 metric tons of CO2-eq emissions across a 14-year timeline. 5. Set goal of 50% electric belt loaders and bag tugs in a 7-year period (by 2023), replacing vehicles as they retire. In a worst case scenario where JetBlue receives no funding and pays the higher cost for all new vehicles instead of refurbished, JetBlue will save roughly $4.3 million and 89,200 metric tons of CO2-eq emissions across a 14-year timeline. 6. Research feasibility of retrofitting 100% electric belt loaders, bag tugs, and push backs, replacing vehicles are they retire. This can maximize the opportunity to save roughly $7 million in fuel costs (assuming funding is received) and over 60,000 metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions over 14 years.Item Open Access Assessing the Water Footprint of Electric Car Batteries – A Dive into the Water-Energy Nexus(2023-04-28) MacDonald, Kathlyn; Thornton, Karen; Allen, Mary Margaret; Katayama, TaroWater has been historically overlooked as a criterion when measuring the environmental impact of a project. This project aims to visualize the water impacts and risks associated with extracting three critical minerals commonly used in electric vehicle (EV) batteries (lithium, cobalt, and nickel) on behalf of Rivian – an EV manufacturing company. As EVs become increasingly popular, the demand for minerals and metals used in their production, such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, has increased. The mining of these minerals often takes place in water-stressed areas, which can have negative environmental and social impacts. The goal of this project is to assess the water risks associated with mining these minerals and provide recommendations for a more sustainable supply chain. The objectives of this project are to identify potential "hot spots" in the EV supply chain where water risks are most prevalent, evaluate the consumption of water from mining the three minerals, and provide recommendations to create a more sustainable supply chain. We narrowed the supply chain to include an analysis of the mining of three critical EV battery raw materials – lithium, cobalt, and nickel. We researched the specific supply chains of these three minerals and found the geographic location of the top 10 mines by production, with some exceptions. These mines were then overlayed with water scarcity data from WRI’s Aqueduct tool. A dashboard was created to express these findings. In the interest of transparency, we made sure to gather as much water consumption data as possible for the mining processes of lithium, cobalt, and nickel. Though we encountered some limitations during this process, such as differing functional units and definitions of water consumption/use, we did our best to create an informative table displaying our findings. We acknowledge that some of our sources lacked scientific confidence and our sample may not have been fully representative. Potential supply chain hot spots - mines located in areas of high stress extremely high stress, or arid and low water use - were located for each mineral. For cobalt, the potential hot spots included the Murrin Murrin mine in Australia. For lithium, the potential hot spots include Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile and Albemarle’s Chile operations. It is also important to note the Greenbush Mine in Australia was located less than 10 miles from a location of high water scarcity and thus, was included in our potential hot spots. For nickel, the potential hot spots include Mount Keith Mine in Australia. The broader ramifications of this work include the potential to promote more sustainable practices within the EV industry. By identifying potential "hot spots" in the supply chain where water stress risks are most present, this project provides a framework for developing a more sustainable supply chain. The recommendations provided in this project can help stakeholders in the EV industry to make more wholistic decisions about the environmental and social impacts of their production practices by including water consumption impacts. This project highlights the need for greater attention to be paid to water scarcity within the EV supply chain. By analyzing the water risks associated with mining critical minerals for EVs and providing recommendations for a more sustainable supply chain, this project seeks to promote more responsible production practices within the EV industry. The findings of this project have the potential to inform future research and policy initiatives aimed at addressing the environmental and social impacts of EV production. Moving forward, there is a need for more comprehensive data on water consumption and direct engagement with upstream suppliers to better understand the potential risks at these locations. Companies in the EV industry should also assess the sustainability of their supply chains on an individual level and explore alternative sources for critical minerals to reduce reliance on high-risk locations.Item Open Access Building a Better Business Intelligence Platform for EV Charging Developers(2024-04-25) Dreis, Andrew; Belcher, HarlanWhile working with NextEra’s Energy Mobility team we realized that there is inadequate data on commercial vehicle fleet locations in the US. This market intelligence blind spot slows down the sales process for EV charging infrastructure and associated services. Based on this discovery, we built a business plan for a software sales tool that could vastly expand the data pool available to companies who sell to vehicle fleets. This product rests on a novel computer vision approach to identifying vehicle fleets. The product, still in development, processes the type and number of vehicles in satellite imagery and then matches that data with business information, increasing sales efficiency. Further analysis revealed estimated market size, customers, competitors, and go-to-market strategy. Interviews with computer vision experts and industry players validated our findings and strategies.Item Open Access Clarifying the Factors to Decide to Purchase Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs) and Electric Vehicles (EVs)(2011-04-27) Haraya, EiichiRecently, gasoline vehicles are more frequently being replaced by hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and electric vehicles (EVs). For private companies interested in selling HEVs and EVs, it is crucial to understand why people purchase HEVs and EVs rather than gasoline vehicles in order to promote those sells effectively. Additionally, replacing gasoline vehicles with HEVs and EVs leads the automobile industry and its customers to take responsibility to reduce carbon dioxide emission. The purpose of this study is to comprehend the factors affecting decisions to purchase HEVs and EVs. A survey instrument on factors determining individual vehicle purchase decisions was developed and refined through a focus group, an expert review, and a pre-testing. Using the completed instrument, an intercept survey was conducted at Durham (NC) farmers’ market and the religious meeting. The result indicated that willingness to pay (WTP) for HEVs and EVs is statistically higher than WTP for gasoline vehicles. WTP for HEVs and EVs is positively related to number of children, number of household vehicles and average annual driving distance, while it is negatively related to an individual’s stated level of importance for fuel-efficiency.Item Open Access Comparative Analysis on the Allocation of Environmental Mitigation Trust Funds at EPA Region 4(2019-04-25) Liu, Yuncheng; Kong, Edmond; Zhu, ShengnanA notice of violation of the Clean Air was issued to Volkswagen Group by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2015. Volkswagen was revealed to have intentionally programmed a “defeat device” in approximately 11 million of its 2.0-liter diesel vehicles. On-road NOx emission tests of Volkswagen models conducted during 2014 revealed that average emissions actually exceeded NOx emission levels by nearly 40 times the U.S. federal limit. As part of a settlement agreement, Volkswagen accepted the $14.9 billion penalty after acknowledging that it installed devices on diesel motors to make them appear to meet strict emissions standards when in reality they did not. Following a guideline of eligible mitigation actions set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, each state must submit their own beneficiary mitigation plan which will include projects aimed at reducing NOx and other pollutant emissions in the transportation sector. States can fund projects and develop programs that align their interests, within the boundaries set through the settlement. Those boundaries involve replacing older diesel equipment or vehicles with new models that emit less pollution. The replacement vehicles can use a variety of fuels including diesel, electricity, natural gas and propane. A portion of the settlement would set aside $2.9 billion for an environmental mitigation trust where states can receive an allocation as beneficiaries. The size of these allocations is based on the number of violating vehicles registered within their jurisdiction. Although considerable research has been devoted to the allocation fund of California (about 423 million) in EPA Region 9, less attention has been paid to EPA Region 4, which ranks second in funding allocations and includes 7 states. These states are North Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi. Through model building examining cost effectiveness and semi-structured interviews with government planning officials, this study addresses this research gap by quantifying and comparing the environmental benefits generated by investing the Volkswagen Mitigation Trust Fund in different programs included in the Proposed Beneficiary Mitigation Plans submitted to date within EPA Region 4. Results show the differences in pollutant reduction cost effectiveness for different fuels (Electricity, Diesel, or Compressed Natural Gas) and vehicle uses (Transit or School).Item Open Access Cost Barriers Analysis for Public and Workplace Electric Vehicle Charging Stations(2020-04-22) Shenaut, Elizabeth ("Liz")Shifting vehicular transportation from gas to electric is crucial for reducing climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution from tailpipes. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is one of several California state agencies working to electrify transportation. Business models for public and workplace electric vehicle (EV) charging stations face profitability challenges. This study evaluates how CPUC should lower cost barriers for companies that offer charging as a service, so that these companies will undertake more projects at public and workplace locations. Policy recommendations stemming from this analysis are: • Establish electricity rate structures that optimizing for affordability each billing period by adjusting demand charges relative to total electricity use. • Change electric rules on cost sharing between utilities and customers for transformer upgrades to reduce the portion a station developer pays. • Expand use of utility funds for “make-ready” infrastructure to all publicly accessible EV charging sites, eliminating those costs for station developers. California’s Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 ordered CPUC to direct electric utilities to file applications for large transportation electrification programs. A 2018 executive order from the governor set a state target for 250,000 EV charging stations by 2025 and 5 million zero-emission vehicles by 2030. The state is not on track to meet these targets, and its transportation greenhouse gas emissions are growing. Availability of public and workplace EV charging stations is key to enabling drivers to choose electric vehicles without fearing they will run out of charge on the road. Drivers without access to home charging rely entirely upon publicly accessible EV charging. Two common power levels of public charging stations are Level 2 and DC fast, which charge a battery in several hours and in half an hour, respectively. This study’s author builds a cost model that takes user inputs about an EV charging site’s features and use, and produces low-, mid- and high- range cost values for that scenario. Costs are annualized and divided by annual electricity use, yielding output in dollars per kilowatt-hour, called the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). Insights from the cost model analysis include: High charger usage brings down LCOE dramatically, electricity costs most frequently comprise the largest proportion of LCOE, and DC fast chargers have higher and more variable LCOE than Level 2 chargers. Public EV charging costs 2 to 25 times more than average electricity rates, and on a per-mile basis it costs 1.5 to 15 times more than driving on gasoline. Among policy options identified through expert interviews and literature review, this study recommends options consistent with its cost model results and CPUC’s goals. CPUC values fostering a competitive market for EV charging, minimizing greenhouse gas emissions from the electric grid, reducing air pollution in disadvantaged communities, and choosing strategies that are straightforward to implement. The first recommended policy would introduce a new electricity rate structure for EV chargers. It would improve the balance between two kinds of electricity costs and minimize the monthly bill. The second recommend policy would reduce or remove the cost of any necessary transformer upgrades from the station developer’s perspective by shifting the cost to the utility. The third recommended policy would also remove a cost for charging-as-a-service providers. The utility, rather than the station developer, would pay for work such as trenching wires to making a parking space ready for a charging unit. When implementing these strategies, CPUC should involve members of environmentally and economically disadvantaged communities in planning and decision-making to ensure policy effectiveness and equitable outcomes.Item Open Access Cost Barriers Analysis for Public and Workplace Electric Vehicle Charging Stations(2020-04-24) Shenaut, ElizabethShifting vehicular transportation from gas to electric is crucial for reducing climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants from tailpipes. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is one of several California state agencies working to electrify transportation. Business models for public and workplace electric vehicle (EV) charging stations face profitability challenges. This study uses cost modeling and interviews to evaluate how CPUC should lower cost barriers for companies that offer charging as a service, so that these companies will undertake more projects at public and workplace locations. Policy recommendations stemming from this analysis are: • Establish electricity rate structures that adjust demand charges relative to volumetric charges, optimizing for overall affordability each billing period. • Change electric rules on cost sharing between utilities and customers for transformer upgrades to reduce the portion a station developer pays. • Expand use of utility funds for “make-ready” infrastructure to all publicly accessible EV charging stations, eliminating those costs for station developers.Item Open Access Electric Utilities and the EV Market: A Decision-Making Tool for State-Specific Strategies(2020-04-20) Jaishankar, Aishwarya; Weaver, MichelleChange in U.S. electricity demand has been nearly flat over the past decade. In parallel, electric vehicle (EV) market growth offers opportunities for boosting the revenue and resilience of utilities, while supporting climate change goals. This project uses market research and expert interviews to assess how utilities can best advance the EV market, address key challenges, and benefit from new opportunities. A state-specific multi-criteria decision matrix was developed to rank the viability of ten commonly used utility EV programs based on a utility users’ characteristics. The criteria used to determine the rankings were: profitability through internal rate of return analysis, risk as the probability and impact of failure, state policy environment, and history of regulatory action. Specific case studies yielded that utilities across the U.S. should focus on implementing time of use rates, improving customer engagement, and investing in public and private charging infrastructure.Item Open Access Electric Vehicles: Cost and Emissions Analysis for CA Electric Grid(2012-04-26) Patadia, ShanaElectric vehicles have been suggested as one of the primary possible solutions to fuel dependency and emissions reduction, but hesitation has been expressed as to the actual emissions reductions that electric vehicles would bring as well as the cost impacts on the individual vehicle owner. This Masters Project analyzes the impacts of various scenarios of the integration of a passenger electric vehicle fleet into the California electric grid through Vehicle to Grid Services (V2G). The central focus of this analysis was to determine what percentage of vehicles can complete their standard driving behavior with an electric vehicle based on different assumptions of charging availability as well as battery and charging technology assumptions. To accommodate a range of possible future grid situations, three technology scenarios were conducted. Using these three grid scenarios the model was also able to show what the approximate cost would be per vehicle-week and vehicle-mile of using electric charging. The data showed that even the pessimistic technology baseline demonstrated superior costs and emissions as compared to conventional vehicles. All three scenarios reduced emissions by more than three-fold and the cost per mile was found to be an eighth of the conventional vehicle cost. The cost differences result from lower electricity “fueling” costs as compared to gasoline fueling costs, as well from the earnings the vehicles received from selling their electricity to the grid through V2G. At maximum, a total of 65 vehicles out of 841 vehicles “failed” meaning that the model could not find a way to allow them completion of their driving. This has significant implications as many concerns exist as to the feasibility of electric vehicles for the majority of drivers, but this data demonstrates that less than 8% of the employed population in CA has driving unfit for electric vehicles. The remainder of the population, 92%, could complete their driving under an aggregator controlled V2G scheme. These conclusions imply that a reasonable amount of investment into Level 2 chargers and Vehicle to Grid infrastructure, could result in savings or the consumer, increased frequency regulation for the grid, and significant emissions reductions.Item Open Access Moving Duke to A Clean Future – An Approach through Electric Vehicles(2020-04-20) Zhang, Xin; Zhu, YuchenDuke’s 2009 Climate Action Plan (CAP) has committed Duke to a carbon-neutral institution by 2024. In a recent update version published in 2019, Duke’s CAP focused on internal emission reduction strategies, especially on energy usage and transportation, to make sure Duke University strives to reduce emissions by 78% by 2024 compared to the 2007 baseline. Additionally, the updated plan showed that only transportation emission went up by 24% in 2019 compared to the 2007 baseline, especially the emission from employees’ commuting. Therefore, Sustainable Duke initiated this study to explore the potential of cutting transportation-related emissions from employees’ commuting by electrifying employee-owned vehicles. The results of the study show that Duke University can cut up to 17% of emission if implemented suggested incentive programs, and it is necessary to install additional EV charging infrastructure on campus.Item Open Access The Electric Vehicle Transition: An Analysis of the EV Value Chain and Market Entry Strategies for an Energy Client(2020-04-24) Adams, Tucker; Davenport, Emily; Vitha, JayThe increasing adoption of Electric Vehicles (EVs) will change the landscape of several industries including transportation, technology, and electric power. EVs will impact the business plans and strategies of energy providers as they continue to provide energy to customers. An energy client is trying to capture the additional value that EVs are going to bring to the energy sector. This study analyzes and categorizes the current state of the EV market, both in Texas and nationally, organizes the current projections made from large industry reports, assesses the value chain of EVs and provides recommendations for an energy client about how to best proceed with a new strategy that incorporates EVs to make the firm successful in this quickly changing industry.Item Open Access The Impact of Electric Vehicle Adoption in North Carolina(2019-04-24) Chen, Shiwen; Jiang, Yi; Shen, Yangdi; Singh, NikhitaThe U.S total annual sales of Battery Electric Vehicles (EVs) and Plug-in EVs increased from 16 thousand in 2011 to 190 thousand in 2017; that is 12 times in size over 6 years (Fitzgerald). Consequently, the demand for electricity has increased rapidly, which creates new challenges and opportunities for the electricity generation system and the power grid. This project assesses the impacts of different scenarios of penetration of EVs in the Duke Energy Carolinas/Duke Energy Progress (DEC/DEP) region in 2030. Specifically, the project simulates the real-time EVs operation in 2030 and provides economic, environmental and social insights. First this project will characterize scenarios of EV penetration in the region that take EV growth and charging patterns into consideration. Then the additional demand caused by each scenario will be generated by a custom model built for this project. Lastly this project will utilize Aurora, an electric modeling, forecasting, and analysis tool, to simulate the impact of the additional demand on the DEC/DEP system in 2030. The results of this project underline the relationship between the economic and environmental impact of electric vehicles and the DEC/DEP fuel mix.Item Open Access Understanding State-Level Regulatory Considerations for Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment in South Carolina(2021-04-29) Frantz, EmmaElectric vehicle (EV) demand in the U.S. is growing. With this growth comes increased demand for public charging infrastructure, or electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). States in the Southeast generally fall behind other states in EV adoption and public EVSE deployment from a lack of policy support and funding incentives. Ambiguity around aspects of regulation creates additional challenges for implementing supportive policies and programs. Through state-level policy analysis and expert interviews, this project identified current trends and methods used for regulating EVSE in relation to ownership, pricing, and standards for measuring the amount of electricity dispensed. This analysis is intended to provide the state of South Carolina an overview of actions that other states are taking on the matter and to provide recommendations for developing a regulatory plan that fosters growth of EV adoption and EVSE deployment in the region.