MOTIVATION FOR PHEV/BEV FEASIBILITY STUDY

At the outset, replacement of conventional fossil-fuel driven public transportation fleets with cleaner and greener Plug-in Hybrid/BEV alternatives seems lucrative

Parameter Conventional Plug-in Diesel Hybrid/BEV Fuel Savings Fuel Economy Tailpipe CO2 Emissions Noise Pollution Initial Cost

Operating & Running Favorable

Cost Unfavorable GLOBAL SCENARIO OF ELECTRIC /PILOTS

City/Country Technology Bus Manufacturer Project Details Bangalore BEV BYD Pilot tested PHEV Test Stage Completed Stockholm PHEV Volvo Test Stage 800 diesel-electric hybrids London HEV Volvo (NewRoutemasters) are running on commercial routes London PHEV Alexander Dennis Test Stage US (Texas, Collarado, HEV BYD Test Stage Iowa) US (Long Beach, Los Test Stage Complete BEV BYD Angeles) Commercial operation to begin HongKong BEV BYD Test Stage HEV BYD Shenzhen Commercial operation BEV Wuzhoulong Motors Motors Madrid HEV BYD Trial Operations with 10 buses Hino Motors Japan (Hamura, Tokyo) BEV Hno Motors Commercial operation 35 Buses to be supplied for Airport Amsterdam BEV BYD Operation BEV BYD Test Stage Canada BEV BYD Test Stage 700 Buses to be supplied for trials and BEV BYD operation 500 buses to be suppplied to Tourism Uruguay BEV BYD Department Singapore BEV BYD Test Stage OVERVIEW OF ELECTRIC DRIVE TECHNOLOGIES

Depending on the degree of electrification Technology Main Characteristics of propulsion system: • Uses electric motor + IC engine to propel vehicle HEV • IC engine powered by conventional fuel • Hybrid Electric Vehicle • Motor powered by battery (charged through mechanical means such • Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle as Regenerative Braking) • Battery Electric Vehicle • Propulsion similar to HEV PHEV • Motor powered by Battery and/or IC engine • Fuel Cell electric technologies • Battery charged through plug-in electricity • Propulsion through electric traction motor BEV • Battery is only source to power motor and ancillary systems • Relatively large on-board battery

Comparative Analysis of benefits from different electric drive technologies

Fuel Economy (BEV uses no Benefits liquid fuel) HEV PHEV

Tailpipe Emission Reduction PHEV Benefits HEV BEV

Operating and Running Fuel cost HEV BEV savings PHEV Energy Source Propulsion Device Figure: Different Degrees of Electrification of Vehicles Increasing PHEV POWERTRAIN ARCHITECTURES

Fig 1: Series Drivetrain Architecture Fig 2: Parallel Drivetrain Architecture Fig 3: Series-Parallel Hybrid Drivetrain Architecture

POWERTRAIN ARCHITECTURE SERIES HYBRID PARALLEL HYBRID PARAMETERS • Electric Motor Provides torque to axle • Both Electric Motor and IC Engine provide torque Prime Mover • IC Engine runs generator that charges battery • IC Engine also acts as prime mover when necessary • CDM • Charge Depleting Mode (CDM) • CSM Modes of Operation • Charge Sustaining Mode (CSM) • Blended Mode • Blended Mode • Mixed Mode • Bigger Battery Size • Comparitively Smaller Battery size Battery & All Electric Range • Longer electric range • Limited electric range Motor Size Larger motor Smaller Motor Does not require conventional transmission Requires conventional transmission Transmission System (Since IC engine not prime mover) (IC engine and motor are prime movers) Operational suitability Suitable for Small/Mid-range application (urban Suitable for Long Range applications (highways) charging environment) BATTERY TECHNOLOGY

Desirable features of an electrical battery pack are: This figure shows common • Powerful batteries in automotive field.

• Durable Lithium and Ni-MH batteries main stream for electric (PHEV, • Dense HEV, EV) and commercial (IC) vehicles Li-ion v/s Sealed Lead Acid (SLA) Batteries (automotive Batteries) 5 times energy density Due to their shown

Low Discharge Rates characteristics, Li-ion High Initial batteries are Sustained High Performance Cost extremely suitable PHEV: Fast Charging Batteries Low Maintenance Cost for use in electric Two characteristics of a battery make it feasible in an urban bus system: vehicles.. Longer Lifespan • Rapid Charging (minimize time spent on charging)

Cost Considerations • Long Cycle Life (minimal replacement of battery) The high costs are bound to decrease on Y-O-Y basis with tremendous amount of research being conducted in this area. These conditions are satisfactorily fulfilled by a new breed of Li-ion Following table gives a cost projection of different battery types in USD/kWh batteries called the Lithium Titanate Batteries (full name lithium metatitanate; Li4Ti5O12 or LTO). Battery System (Complete without 2012 2015 2020 • LTO battery has been tested and proved to be most appropriate choice charger) Li-ion (includes sophisticated BMS for electric vehicles (PHEV in particular) 600-750 400-500 250-300 and cooling) • Two key manufacturers of the LTO currently are Toshiba and Altair NiMH (includes imple BMS & cooling 500-700 400-500 350-400 for HEV only) Nanomaterials. NiCd (includes simple controller) 400-600 350-450 300-350 Lead-Acid/SLA (includes simple 220-250 200-220 180-200 controller) GOTHENBURG TRIALS: VOLVO PHEV CASE STUDY

During 2013, undertook field testing of its plug-in hybrid model Electric 7900 in Gothenburg as a part of its electro-mobility plan. Three PHEV buses have been running on the public transportation system of Gothenburg since the summer of 2013.

ELECTRO-MOBILITY PLAN Aspirations Uncertainties Step-by-Step Implementation (from Diesel to) Silent Durability 1) Confirmed Hybrid technology Fuel and energy efficient Vehicle Range 2) a) Plug-in hybrids without charging Low or Zero emissions Cost b) Plug-in hybrids with charging Green House Gas reduction Infrastructure Compatibility 3) Full Electric Buses Sustainable energy resources

Phase I Phase II Phase III Introduction of Hybrid Introduction of charging Electric Buses introduced in Buses lowers fuel stations enable 75% electric city center and PHEV stays consumption by 40% drive with reliability of efficient in inter-city (Complete) diesel operations 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025

Figure: Different Phases of Electro-mobility Plan Diesel HEV PHEV BEV GOTHENBURG TRIALS: VOLVO PHEV CASE STUDY Bus Technology: Volvo Electric 7900

Electric Drive Technology PHEV Charging Methodology Rapid/Fast Charging Charging Technology Conductive Charging Overhead Charging (using Charging Infrastructure rooftop pantographs) Company Specifications

Drivetrain Small Diesel Engine `Electric Motor Volvo I-SAM Components Lithium-ion Battery Output: 150kW Electric Motor Torque(max): 1200 Nm Charging BusBaar Rapid Li-ion Battery Voltage: 600V Technology Charging Total Capacity: 19kWh (overhead pantograph) Charging Stations Route end stations Diesel Engine Volvo D5F215 EURO V/EEV with Charging Time 5-8 minutes Length 12m All-electric 8-10kms Height 3280m Distance Fuel Saving 75% Width 2550m Energy Reduction 60% Passenger 95 Capacity CO2 Reduction 75% No. of 32+1(folded) (max) GOTHENBURG TRIALS: VOLVO PHEV CASE STUDY

Field Trial Results

• PHEV fuel consumption is <11 litres per 100km (81% less than conventional diesel) • Total energy consumption – based on electricity and diesel- is 60% lower overall • Appx 7km of all electric distance (70% of the trial route) • Charging time ranges from 6-10 minutes • Tailpipe CO2 reductions estimated to be around 75% lower

The Way Ahead

• Gothenburg continues in 2014 until completion of 10,000 operating hours • Stockholm has begun a demonstration with 8 Volvo Electric 7900 (PHEV) buses and 2 charging stations • Hamburg and Luxemburg have placed orders for starting demo runs • 7900 Electric Hybrid model has been launched in IAA 2014 • Commercial production by Volvo to commence from 2016 TfL (Travel For London) Electro-mobility Case Study

TfL Hybrid (HEV) Bus Fleet • London Bus fleet around 8700 buses • Carries 2.3 billion passengers per year serving over 700 routes with 20,000 stops • Around 800 are hybrids (HEVs) (including New Routemasters) • Deliver minimum 30% reduction in CO2 and 30% better fuel economy • More being introduced in a rolling program • Target is 20% (1700) fleet substitution by hybrid buses by 2016 • Projected tailpipe reduction in CO2 emissions upon 20% substitution is around 20,600 tonnes a year

TfL (Travel For London) Electro-mobility Case Study TfL Electric Bus (BEV) Trials

• All single deck buses • Total count of electric is 6 and target was 8 by 2015 • High initial costs but low O&M • Charging time: 5hrs overnight or 2hrs with fast charging • Typical range: 160km (subject to operating conditions)

Challenges for Electric Buses • Size of batteries; a range of 250km requires a battery of over 2 tonnes (weight of 30 passengers) • Impact of ancillary loads reduces available range • During extreme weather conditions, ancillary loads (HVAC, lights, air compressor, power steering, battery cooling) could take up as much energy as moving vehicle TfL (Travel For London) Electro-mobility Case Study

TfL Plug-in Hybrid (PHEV) Trials • Aim to operate vehicles on grid electricity as much as possible (70% electric distance) • Buses being provided by Alexander Dennis and charging technology by IPT Technology • Demo on Route 69 between Canning Town and Walthamstow bus stations (appx 12km) • operate in a highly busy environment • Wireless charging is the selected method because of its convenience to quickly charge buses • Recharging at end stations (like Gothenburg) • Alexander Dennis Enviro400H E400 buses (double deck) PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AHMEDABAD MTS

The following analysis carried out for the Parameters Used Ahmedabad MTS : PARAMETER VALUE SOURCE Total Fleet 942 AMTS Data 1) Charging Infrastructure Analysis Fleet Utilization 84.80% Metropolitan fleet Data 2) Cost Analysis Rapid Charging Time (8C) (minutes) 10 Volvo Gotheburg Test Results 3) Energy Consumption/Savings Patterns Nominal Cost of Diesel (Rs/L) 66 mypetrolprice.com 4) CO2 Emission Patterns

Variables Used: Y-O-Y increase in Diesel Price 7% Historic Trends rom mypetrolprice.com 1) Level of PHEV Fleet Substitution 2) Level of PHEV Electromobility (electric Roland Berger Strategic Consultant Battery LTO battery Cost ('000 Rs/kWh) 30 distance as fraction of total distance) Projections Report 2012 Roland Berger Strategic Consultant Battery Y-O-Y decrease in battery cost 9% Assumptions Used Projections Report 2012 ICEV Diesel Fuel Efficiency (km/l) 5 AMTS Data ASSUMPTION VALUE PHEV Diesel Fuel Efficiency (km/l) 8 Proterra and Volvo trials Life of bus (years) 10 Volvo Gotheburg Test Results Electric mileage (kWh/km) 2 Cost of PHEV (Rs lakh) 300 Research work on Electric buses Vehicle Productivity 250 Electricity Equivalency (tCO2/kWh) 0.00078 CEA Data for NEWNE Grids Diesel Equivalency (tCO2/litre) 0.00287 IPCC 2006 Guidelines Operational days per year 300 Normal Electricity Charges (Rs/unit) 3.9 Torrent Power Ltd-Ahmedabad Battery Technology Toshiba LTO Peak Electricity Charges (Rs/unit) 4.6 Torrent Power Ltd-Ahmedabad Battery Size 24kWh (380kg) Demand Charges (Rs/kW/month) 210 Torrent Power Ltd-Ahmedabad PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Charging Infrastructure

• PHEV operation in busy urban environment becomes Two-fold objectives of Charging Infrastructure practical only with intra-day charging 1. It allows maximum possible electromobility (electric • Intra-day charging causes hindrance to travel time and distance travelled) within constraints of practical so practical only with fast/rapid charging operational infrastructure. 2. Minimum time is spent on charging during routine operation • The charging analysis is based on the assumption that Rapid Charging Infrastructure has been used. Practical Operation Constraints Inter-City (250km): Alternate Stations (and in-turn successive charging) are at least 40 km apart. Increase in journey time (due to charging) is at most 20%

Intra-City (250km per day): Selected routes are such that charging done at end-stations. PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Charging Infrastructure

Conventional PHEV (% electromobility) Journey Parameters Diesel 100% 80% 60% 40% 30% 20% 10% The tables contain Distance Travelled per Day 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 (km) estimated values for Avergae Speed (kmph) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 different Journey Fuelling/Charging Time (hrs) 0 3.7 3.0 2.3 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 Parameters and Total Journey Time (hrs) 7.3 11.0 10.3 9.6 9.0 8.6 8.3 8.0 Charging Parameters.

PHEV (% electromobility) Charging Parameters 100% 80% 60% 40% 30% 20% 10% Battery Capacity 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh Electric Distance Travelled in Selection of 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 single Charge (km) Number of Charging Stations Appropriate 20 16 12 8 6 4 2 Required on route Electromobility Level Distance between charging 12.5 15.6 20.8 31.3 41.7 62.5 125.0 Stations (km) for long haul and short Number of Charging Cycles per 22 18 14 10 8 6 4 day haul distances Chargin time per trip (hrs) 3.7 3.0 2.3 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 depends on these Number of charging cycles per 6600 5400 4200 3000 2400 1800 1200 year parameters Number of Battery Replacements 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 during vehicle lifespan PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Charging Infrastructure

Conventio PHEV (% electromobility) Practicality Considerations Journey Parameters nal Diesel 100% 80% 60% 40% 30% 20% 10% for Inter-City Journey (Long Distance Travelled per Day 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 Haul) (km) Avergae Speed (kmph) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Fuelling/Charging Time (hrs) 0 3.7 3.0 2.3 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 Total Journey Time (hrs) 7.3 11.0 10.3 9.6 9.0 8.6 8.3 8.0 Increase in journey time is 10% - 18% due to added charging time PHEV (% electromobility) Charging Parameters Hence, electromobility 100% 80% 60% 40% 30% 20% 10% Battery Capacity 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh levels of 30% and below Electric Distance Travelled in favorable for Long Haul 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 single Charge (km) Journey Number of Charging Stations 20 16 12 8 6 4 2 Required on route Distance between charging 12.5 15.6 20.8 31.3 41.7 62.5 125.0 Distance between successive Stations (km) Number of Charging Cycles per stations (and charging) on 22 18 14 10 8 6 4 day the route ranges from 41-125 Chargin time per trip (hrs) 3.7 3.0 2.3 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 km Number of charging cycles per 6600 5400 4200 3000 2400 1800 1200 Hence, electromobility levels year of 30% and below favorable Number of Battery Replacements 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 during lifespan for Long Haul Journey PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Charging Infrastructure

Conventional PHEV (% electromobility) Practicality Considerations Journey Parameters Diesel 100% 80% 60% 40% 30% 20% 10% for Intra-City Journey (Short Distance Travelled per Day 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 Haul) (km) Avergae Speed (kmph) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Increase in journey time is Fuelling/Charging Time (hrs) 0 3.7 3.0 2.3 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 translated into reduced Total Journey Time (hrs) 7.3 11.0 10.3 9.6 9.0 8.6 8.3 8.0 number of trips per day and so not significant Hence, High electromobility PHEV (% electromobility) Charging Parameters 100% 80% 60% 40% 30% 20% 10% is favorable for intra-city Battery Capacity 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh 24kWh travel Electric Distance Travelled in 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 single Charge (km) Distance between successive Number of Charging Stations 20 16 12 8 6 4 2 stations (and charging) Required on route Distance between charging decides the route on which 12.5 15.6 20.8 31.3 41.7 62.5 125.0 Stations (km) PHEV are deployed Number of Charging Cycles per 22 18 14 10 8 6 4 So, a route distance of 12 km day can have a PHEV running at Chargin time per trip (hrs) 3.7 3.0 2.3 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 100% electromobility Number of charging cycles per 6600 5400 4200 3000 2400 1800 1200 Hence, High electromobility year Number of Battery Replacements is favorable for short intra- 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 during lifespan city routes PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Cost Analysis

Single PHEV Cash Flow: 60% Electromobility Cash Flow representation for one 3000 PHEV bus operating at 60% 2500 electromobiliy 2000 (i.e 60% electric distance) 1500 1000

) 500 Rs 0 • Life of bus is 10 years

(‘000 (‘000 -500 -1000 • Battery is 24kWh Toshiba Scib -1500 LTO(assumption) -2000 -2500 • Involves 3 battery replacements over the -3000 lifespan 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Year (life of bus) • With more substitution of fleet with PHEV Bus Cost ('0000 Rs) Diesel Savings ('000 Rs) Battery Costs ('000 Rs) Fuel Costs ('000 Rs) (Electricity + Diesel) buses, increase in diesel savings is much more than increase in fuel costs PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Cost Analysis

Figure 1: Total capital costs for varying levels of PHEV fleet substitution at Figure 2: Battery costs (from replacements) for varying levels of PHEV fleet different electromobility levels substitution at different electromobility levels

PHEV Fleet Substitution PHEV Fleet Substitution

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

- - (200) (5,000)

(400) (10,000) (600) (15,000) (800) (1,000)

(20,000) Rs) (million (1,200)

(25,000) (1,400)

CAPEX: Bus and Charging and Bus CAPEX: Battery Replacement Costs Replacement Battery

Infrastructure Cost (million Rs) (million Cost Infrastructure 60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility 60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility

Figure 4: Total Diesel monetary savings for varying levels of PHEV fleet Figure 3: Total fuel (electric + diesel) costs for varying levels of PHEV fleet substitution at different electromobility levels substitution at different electromobility levels

PHEV Fleet Substitution

70,00,000 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Axis Title 60,00,000 Axis Title - 50,00,000 (1,000)

40,00,000 (2,000) 30,00,000 (3,000) 20,00,000 (4,000) (5,000) 10,00,000 (million Rs) (million (6,000)

Diesel Savings (million Rs) (million Savings Diesel - 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% (7,000) PHEV Fleet Substitution Fuel (Electric+Diesel) Costs Costs (Electric+Diesel) Fuel 60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility 60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility **All cash flows shown in figures have been estimated over the lifespan of Bus (10 years)

Axis Title PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Cost Analysis

• For a given level of fleet substitution and electromobility, the different

cash flows are used to estimate the ) 70,00,000 Rs Net Present Value (NPV) of the bus 60,00,000

(million over its lifetime (10 years) 50,00,000 (Discount Rate taken as 5%)

40,00,000 • The graph clearly shows a positive 30,00,000 correlation between the NPV and 20,00,000 Value (over 10 year Life) Life) year 10 (over Value level of substitution 10,00,000

Net Present Present Net - 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% • Highly positive NPV can be PHEV Fleet Substitution attributed to huge savings accrued

60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility from reduction in Diesel usage PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Energy Consumption

120 1.20%

1.00%

100 0.80%

0.60%

80 0.40%

0.20% Electricity Consumption as % of % as Consumption Electricity 60 Requirement Energy Ahmedabad 0.00% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

0.12% 40 0.10%

Electricity Consumption (MUs/year) Consumption Electricity 0.08% 0.06% 20 0.04% 0.02% 0 0.00%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Gujarat Energy Requirement Energy Gujarat

PHEV Fleet Substitution of % as Consumption Electricity PHEV Fleet Substitution

60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility 60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility

Figure 1: Annual electricity consumption for varying levels of PHEV fleet Figure 2: Annual electricity consumption as a fraction of Ahmedabad and substitution at different electromobility levels Gujarat annual energy requirement PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: Energy Consumption

3000 12000

2500 10000

2000 8000

1500 6000

1000 4000 Diesel Savings (kL/year) Savings Diesel

Diesel Consumption (kL/year) Consumption Diesel 500 2000

0 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% PHEV Fleet Substitution PHEV Fleet Substitution

60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility 60% Electromobility 80% Electromobility 100% Electromobility

Figure 3: Annual diesel consumption by PHEV buses for varying levels of fleet Figure 4: Annual diesel savings by shift from conventional bus to PHEV bus for varying substitution at different electromobility levels levels of fleet substitution at different electromobility levels PHEV CASE STUDY FOR AMTS: CO2 Emission Pattern

Single PHEV Emission Data Single PHEV Net Emission Data Tailpipe Emission; 60% Electromobility 60% Electromobility; 5% Renewable Fraction*

35 80

30 25 60 20 40 15 10 20 5 Metric tonnes of CO2 of tonnes Metric 0

0 CO2 of tonnes Metric 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Life of Bus (years) Life of Bus (year)

Tailpipe CO2 Emitted (metric tonnes) CO2 Saved (metric tonnes) CO2 Emitted (metric tonnes) CO2 Saved (metric tonnes)

Figure1: Tailpipe emissions and savings of CO2 with substitution of one conventional bus Figure2: Net emissions and savings of CO2 with substitution of one conventional bus with with a PHEV bus at the given levels a PHEV bus at the given levels • The emission estimates take into account a. CO2 emitted by coal based grid electricity generation which is in-turn used for charging PHEVs b. Tailpipe emissions

• The saving estimates take into account savings in tailpipe emission

• Higher renewable fraction (higher fraction of electricity coming from clean sources) reduces net

emissions by a PHEV *Renewable fraction means fraction of grid electricity generation that comes from renewable (zero-emission) sources KEY TAKEAWAYS

 Highly positive NPVs have been observed for PHEV fleet substitution over the life of project. There is a positive correlation between NPV and the levels of substitution (due to non-linear increase in accrued diesel savings)

 Taking into account practical considerations of charging infrastructure following observations have been made for inter-city and intra-city PHEV bus usage:  Inter-City: PHEV20 - PHEV30 are more favorable  Intra-City: PHEV60 - PHEV100 are more favorable

 Maximum annual electricity consumption (100% electromobility & 100% fleet substitution) is only 1.08% of annual Ahmedabad energy requirement

 PHEV fleet substitution reduces tailpipe CO2 emission with the reduction ranging from 50% (20% Electromobility) to 100% (100% electromobility)

 PHEV fleet substitution project becomes a NET SAVER of CO2 emissions only at (or above) 65-70% renewable fraction. Below this fraction the project acts as a NET EMITTER of CO2