DOCSLIB.ORG

Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Value Proposition Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Value Proposition Study DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY Reports produced after January 1, 1996, are generally available free via the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Information Bridge: Web site: http://www.osti.gov/bridge Reports produced before January 1, 1996, may be purchased by members of the public from the following source: National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Telephone: 703-605-6000 (1-800-553-6847) TDD: 703-487-4639 Fax: 703-605-6900 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.ntis.gov/support/ordernowabout.htm Reports are available to DOE employees, DOE contractors, Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDE) representatives, and International Nuclear Information System (INIS) representatives from the following source: Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831 Telephone: 865-576-8401 Fax: 865-576-5728 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.osti.gov/contact.html This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. ORNL/TM-2010/46 Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Value Proposition Study Final Report July 2010 OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831 managed by UT-BATTELLE, LLC for the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 This page intentionally left blank. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) Value Proposition Study is a collaborative effort between Sentech, Inc., Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), General Electric (GE) Global Research, Ohio State University Center for Automotive Research (OSU CAR), and Taratec Corporation. The following individuals from these organizations are among those who contributed throughout the duration of this study: Sentech, Inc. Taratec Corporation Tim P. Cleary* Chuck Meadow Shaun C. Hinds Howard Mueller Lawrence C. Markel Ed Ungar* Dr. Ralph McGill* Perry Jones GE Global Research Karen G. Sikes* Herman Wiegman Richard E. Ziegler Consultant ORNL Thomas Gross* Robert C. DeVault Dr. David L. Greene EPRI Stanton W. Hadley* Daniel Brooks Mitchell Olszewski David E. Smith Argonne National Laboratory Richard L. Smith Andrew Burnham OSU CAR Dr. Vincenzo Marano* *Co-authors Members of the PHEV Value Proposition Study’s Guidance & Evaluation Committee also provided valuable insights and feedback throughout the study. A listing of the committee’s members can be found at http://www.sentech.org/phev/pdfs/Guidance_Committee.pdf. PHEV Value Proposition Study – Final Report Draft / July 2010 i This page intentionally left blank. ii PHEV Value Proposition Study – Final Report Draft / July 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................. X FACT SHEET ................................................................................................................................................... XIII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. ............................................................................................................................. XXIV FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS .......................................................................................................... XXIX 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2. OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3. PROJECT OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................ 1 1.3.1. Value Proposition Study – Phase 1 .......................................................................................................... 2 1.3.2. Market Introduction Study ....................................................................................................................... 2 1.3.3. Value Proposition Study – Phase 2 .......................................................................................................... 3 2. INDUSTRY SNAPSHOT ............................................................................................................................ 4 2.1. SUPPORTIVE POLICIES – EXISTING AND POTENTIAL ............................................................................................... 4 2.2. PHEV DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION PLANS ................................................................................................... 4 2.3. PLANNING FOR PHEVS BY ELECTRIC UTILITIES .................................................................................................... 7 3. APPROACH ............................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1. PHEV VALUE PROPOSITION WORKSHOP ............................................................................................................. 8 3.2. GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................................................................ 10 3.2.1. Market and Regulatory .......................................................................................................................... 10 3.2.2. Vehicle .................................................................................................................................................. 11 3.2.3. Charging Behavior / Infrastructure Capabilities ..................................................................................... 11 3.3. MODELING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................................. 12 3.3.1. Vehicle Operation ................................................................................................................................. 12 3.3.2. Battery Sizing ....................................................................................................................................... 13 3.3.3. Battery End-of-Life Value ...................................................................................................................... 14 3.3.4. Grid Impact ........................................................................................................................................... 14 3.3.5. Environmental Impact ........................................................................................................................... 14 3.4. DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................................ 17 3.5. SELECTION OF CASE STUDIES ......................................................................................................................... 20 3.5.1. Southern California ............................................................................................................................... 20 3.5.2. ECAR / Cleveland, Ohio ......................................................................................................................... 21 3.6. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................... 22 4. CASE STUDY RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ 23 4.1. VEHICLE OWNERSHIP COSTS AND BENEFITS ...................................................................................................... 23 4.1.1. Vehicle Purchase Costs ........................................................................................................................ 23 4.1.2. Vehicle Operating Costs........................................................................................................................ 28 4.1.3. Vehicle End-of-Life Value ...................................................................................................................... 35 4.1.4. “Convenience” Benefits ........................................................................................................................ 35 4.2. BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL BUILDING OWNERS WITH V2B .................................................................................... 37 4.3. IMPACTS OF PHEVS ON ELECTRIC UTILITIES ...................................................................................................... 40 4.3.1. Southern California
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LABOUR and TECHNOLOGY in the CAR INDUSTRY. Ford Strategies in Britain and Brazil
    LABOUR AND TECHNOLOGY IN THE CAR INDUSTRY. Ford strategies in Britain and Brazil Elizabeth Bortolaia Silva Thesis submitted for the Degree of PhD, Imperial College of Science and Technology University of London May 1988 LABOUR AND TECHNOLOGY IN THE CAR INDUSTRY Ford strategies in Britain and Brazil ABSTRACT This thesis looks at aspects of recent changes in international competition in the car industry. It examines the implications of the changes for the relationship between technology and work and it considers how strategies of multinational corporations interact with different national contexts. It is based on a case-study of the Ford Motor Company in its two largest factories in Britain and Brazil, Dagenham and São Bernardo. Chapter 1 describes existing theoretical approaches to comparative studies of technology and work, criticizes technological and cultural determinist approaches and argues for a method that draws on a 'historical regulation' approach. Chapters 2, 3 and 4 describe the long-term background and recent shifts in the pattern of international competition in the motor industry. In particular they look at important shifts in the late 1970s and 1980s and at Ford's changes in management structure and product strategy designed to meet these challenges. Chapter 5 considers recent debates on international productivity comparisons and presents a fieldwork-based comparison of the production process at Dagenham and São Bernardo. The description shows the importance of issues other than technology in determining the flexibility and quality of production. In different national contexts, 2 different mixes of technology and labour can produce comparable results. Chapters 6, 7 and 8 look at the national and local contexts of industrial relations in the two countries to throw light on the different patterns of change observed in the factories.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Buick Lacrosse Owner Manual
    2k16_CS6_Buick_Lacrosse_23180150C.ai 1 2/9/2016 9:49:19 AM C M Y CM MY CY CMY K 23180150 C Buick LaCrosse Owner Manual (GMNA-Localizing-U.S./Canada/Mexico- 9159288) - 2016 - CRC - 10/5/15 Contents Introduction . 2 In Brief . 5 Keys, Doors, and Windows . 26 Seats and Restraints . 49 Storage . 97 Instruments and Controls . 100 Lighting . 148 Infotainment System . 156 Climate Controls . 157 Driving and Operating . 163 Vehicle Care . 226 Service and Maintenance . 313 Technical Data . 326 Customer Information . 330 Reporting Safety Defects . 341 OnStar . 345 Index . 355 Buick LaCrosse Owner Manual (GMNA-Localizing-U.S./Canada/Mexico- 9159288) - 2016 - CRC - 2/3/16 2 Introduction Introduction This manual describes features that Helm, Incorporated may or may not be on the vehicle Attention: Customer Service because of optional equipment that 47911 Halyard Drive was not purchased on the vehicle, Plymouth, MI 48170 model variants, country USA specifications, features/applications that may not be available in your Using this Manual region, or changes subsequent to the printing of this owner manual. To quickly locate information about the vehicle, use the Index in the The names, logos, emblems, Refer to the purchase back of the manual. It is an slogans, vehicle model names, and documentation relating to your alphabetical list of what is in the vehicle body designs appearing in specific vehicle to confirm the manual and the page number where this manual including, but not limited features. it can be found. to, GM, the GM logo, BUICK, the BUICK Emblem, and LACROSSE Keep this manual in the vehicle for are trademarks and/or service quick reference.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Descriptions of Glider Vehicles by Industry Participants
    Comment on EPA Proposed Glider Vehicles Rule, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827, submitted January 5, 2018 Appendix E Descriptions of Glider Vehicles by Industry Participants Description of Glider Vehicles by Glider Manufacturer Fitzgerald Glider Kits, “What is a Glider Kit” https://www.fitzgeraldgliderkits.com/what-is-a-glider-kit (accessed Jan. 3, 2018) Description of Glider Vehicles by Glider Manufacturer Harrison Truck Centers, “Glider Kits” http://www.htctrucks.com/index.php/sales-1/harrison-truck-centers- glider-kits (accessed Jan. 3, 2018) Description of Glider Vehicles by Glider Manufacturer Freightliner, “Glider: The Truck You Always Wanted” Brochure www.dtnaglider.com THE TRUCK YOU ALWayS WaNTED WHICH ONE IS THE GLIDER? IT’S HARD TO TELL Rolling down the road, it’s difficult to spot any differences between a Freightliner Glider and a new Freightliner truck. A Glider kit comes to you as a brand-new, complete assembly that includes the frame, cab, steer axle and wheels, plus a long list of standard equipment. Every Glider also comes with a loose parts box containing up to 160 parts — everything you need to get rolling. YOU PROVIDE WE PROVIDE COMPLETE ASSEMBLY 1 THE NEXT BEST THING TO A NEW TRUCK Designed, engineered and assembled alongside new Freightliner trucks, a Glider gives you everything a new truck offers except for two of the three main driveline components (engine, transmission and rear axle). You can either recapitalize any of these from your existing unit, or spec a factory-installed remanufactured engine or rear axle. BACKED BY A NEW TRUCK WARRANTY Unlike a used truck, every factory-installed component on a Glider is covered by Freightliner’s Warranty.
    [Show full text]
  • Design of an Efficient, Low Weight Battery Electric Vehicle Based on a VW Lupo 3L
    © EVS-25 Shenzhen, China, Nov. 5-9, 2010 The 25th World Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium & Exhibition Design of an efficient, low weight battery electric vehicle based on a VW Lupo 3L I.J.M. Besselink1, P.F. van Oorschot1, E. Meinders1, and H. Nijmeijer1 1Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected] Abstract—A battery electric vehicle is being developed at the Eindhoven University of Technology, which will be used in future research projects regarding electric mobility. Energy storage in batteries is still at least 25 times heavier and has 10 times the volume in comparison to fossil fuel. This leads to an increase of the vehicle weight, especially when trying to maximise the range. A set of specifications is derived, taking into consideration the mobility requirements of people living in the Netherlands and the capabilities of electric vehicles. The VW Lupo 3L 1.2 TDI has been selected as the vehicle to be converted into a battery electric vehicle, since it has many favourable characteristics such as a very low mass and good aerodynamics. The design choices considering the power train and component selection are discussed in detail. Finally the battery electric Lupo is compared to the original Lupo 3L considering energy usage, costs per km and CO2 emissions. With respect to these aspects the advantages of electric propulsion are relatively small, as the donor vehicle is already very fuel efficient. Copyright Form of EVS25. Keywords—battery electric vehicle, power train, vehicle performance project is to develop and demonstrate environmentally 1.
    [Show full text]
  • One Million Electric Vehicles by 2015
    One Million Electric Vehicles By 2015 February 2011 Status Report 1 Executive Summary President Obama’s goal of putting one million electric vehicles on the road by 2015 represents a key milestone toward dramatically reducing dependence on oil and ensuring that America leads in the growing electric vehicle manufacturing industry. Although the goal is ambitious, key steps already taken and further steps proposed indicate the goal is achievable. Indeed, leading vehicle manufacturers already have plans for cumulative U.S. production capacity of more than 1.2 million electric vehicles by 2015, according to public announcements and news reports. While it appears that the goal is within reach in terms of production capacity, initial costs and lack of familiarity with the technology could be barriers. For that reason, President Obama has proposed steps to accelerate America’s leadership in electric vehicle deployment, including improvements to existing consumer tax credits, programs to help cities prepare for growing demand for electric vehicles and strong support for research and development. Introduction In his 2011 State of the Union address, President Obama called for putting one million electric vehicles on the road by 2015 – affirming and highlighting a goal aimed at building U.S. leadership in technologies that reduce our dependence on oil.1 Electric vehicles (“EVs”) – a term that includes plug-in hybrids, extended range electric vehicles and all- electric vehicles -- represent a key pathway for reducing petroleum dependence, enhancing environmental stewardship and promoting transportation sustainability, while creating high quality jobs and economic growth. To achieve these benefits and reach the goal, President Obama has proposed a new effort that supports advanced technology vehicle adoption through improvements to tax credits in current law, investments in R&D and competitive “With more research and incentives, programs to encourage communities to invest we can break our dependence on oil in infrastructure supporting these vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comprehensive Study of Key Electric Vehicle (EV) Components, Technologies, Challenges, Impacts, and Future Direction of Development
    Review A Comprehensive Study of Key Electric Vehicle (EV) Components, Technologies, Challenges, Impacts, and Future Direction of Development Fuad Un-Noor 1, Sanjeevikumar Padmanaban 2,*, Lucian Mihet-Popa 3, Mohammad Nurunnabi Mollah 1 and Eklas Hossain 4,* 1 Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Khulna University of Engineering and Technology, Khulna 9203, Bangladesh; [email protected] (F.U.-N.); [email protected] (M.N.M.) 2 Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa 3 Faculty of Engineering, Østfold University College, Kobberslagerstredet 5, 1671 Kråkeroy-Fredrikstad, Norway; [email protected] 4 Department of Electrical Engineering & Renewable Energy, Oregon Tech, Klamath Falls, OR 97601, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] (S.P.); [email protected] (E.H.); Tel.: +27-79-219-9845 (S.P.); +1-541-885-1516 (E.H.) Academic Editor: Sergio Saponara Received: 8 May 2017; Accepted: 21 July 2017; Published: 17 August 2017 Abstract: Electric vehicles (EV), including Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV), Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV), Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV), Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (FCEV), are becoming more commonplace in the transportation sector in recent times. As the present trend suggests, this mode of transport is likely to replace internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles in the near future. Each of the main EV components has a number of technologies that are currently in use or can become prominent in the future. EVs can cause significant impacts on the environment, power system, and other related sectors. The present power system could face huge instabilities with enough EV penetration, but with proper management and coordination, EVs can be turned into a major contributor to the successful implementation of the smart grid concept.
    [Show full text]
  • Na Plant Locations 092110 Lt Veh Only.Qxp
    North America car and truck assembly plants – 2010 & beyond AM GENERAL FORD T Mishawaka, Ind. – Ford Transit Connect electric Also see AutoAlliance (gliders, assembly only, production counted in Turkey) UNITED STATES B Chicago – Ford Explorer (new, November), Taurus; Lincoln MKS AUTOALLIANCE T Dearborn, Mich. – Ford F-150, Harley Davidson F-150 C Flat Rock, Mich. – Ford Mustang, Mazda Mazda6 sedan T Detroit Chassis Plant (Detroit) – Ford F-series chassis T Kansas City, Mo.: (One Plant) BMW SUV Plant – Ford Escape, Escape Hybrid; Mercury Mariner, Mariner Hybrid; Mazda Tribute B Spartanburg, S.C.† – BMW X3, X5, X6 Truck Plant – Ford F-150 Super Cab, Super Crew Cab, King Crew Cab T Kentucky Truck (Louisville, Ky.) – F-series Super Duty (F-250 - F-550), CAMI Expedition; Lincoln Navigator T Ingersoll, Ontario, Canada – Chevrolet Equinox, Equinox Sport; T Louisville, Ky. – Ford Escape (4th qtr‘11), Explorer (ends Dec. 16), GMC Terrain Explorer SportTrac (ends Oct. 26); Mercury Mountaineer (ends Sept .28) T Michigan Assembly (Wayne, Mich.) – changeover until Jan. 5, 2011 Ford Focus NOTE Per Renee at CAMI: CAMI became a wholly owned T Ohio Assembly (Avon Lake, Ohio) – E series vans, Transit (2013) subsidiary of GMCL on Dec. 10, 2009. CAMI is, however, still aseparate legal entity and its production numbers should, T Twin Cities (St. Paul, Minn.) – (permanent layoff Dec. 24, 2011) – therefore, be reported separately from GMCL. We do not Ford Ranger, Mazda B series expect the amalgamation of CAMI and GMCL to occur until at least Dec. 31, 2010 (maybe later). Once the amalgamation C Wayne, Mich. – (permanent layoff Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Electrification in North Carolina
    ATLAS PUBLIC POLICY WASHINGTON, DC USA SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY KNOXVILLE, TN & ASHEVILLE, NC USA TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION IN NORTH CAROLINA A DEEP DIVE INTO TRAVEL PATTERNS & STATISTICS ACROSS THE EV SECTOR FEBRUARY 2021 CONNER SMITH, ATLAS PUBLIC POLICY TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION IN NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA HIGHLIGHTS ELECTRIC PASSENGER VEHICLES th North Carolina has the 17 largest number of passenger electric vehicles (EVs) and the seventh largest number of electric transit buses on the road in the United States. North Carolina’s EV market grew by five percent through December 2020 while the na�on’s shrank by three percent. ELECTRIC BUSES AND TRUCKS Increasing government funding can create regional demand for electric buses and trucks built by manufacturers opera�ng in the state. Buses and trucks contribute higher per- vehicle miles traveled across North Carolina and their emissions dispropor�onately impact underserved communi�es. ELECTRIC TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE North Carolina has the eighth-highest u�lity investment in the country following November 2020 approvals for Duke Energy investment. North Carolina is the ninth most populous state but ranks 37th in DC fast charging deployment per person. The state can leverage the North Carolina ZEV Plan and $64 million in remaining Volkswagen Setlement funds to accelerate transporta�on electrifica�on. ATLAS PUBLIC POLICY, SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY 2 TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION IN NORTH CAROLINA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NORTH CAROLINA EV MARKET OUTPACES NATIONAL TRENDS IN 2020 North Carolina is emerging as a regional hotspot for transporta�on electrifica�on in the Southeast and has the 17th highest passenger electric vehicle (EV)1 sales in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Morgan Ellis Climate Policy Analyst and Clean Cities Coordinator DNREC [email protected] 302.739.9053
    CLEAN TRANSPORTATION IN DELAWARE WILMAPCO’S OUR TOWN CONFERENCE THE PRESENTATION 1) What are alterative fuels? 2) The Fuels 3) What’s Delaware Doing? WHAT ARE ALTERNATIVE FUELED VEHICLES? • “Vehicles that run on a fuel other than traditional petroleum fuels (i.e. gas and diesel)” • Propane • Natural Gas • Electricity • Biodiesel • Ethanol • Hydrogen THERE’S A FUEL FOR EVERY FLEET! DELAWARE’S ALTERNATIVE FUELS • “Vehicles that run on a fuel other than traditional petroleum fuels (i.e. gas and diesel)” • Propane • Natural Gas • Electricity • Biodiesel • Ethanol • Hydrogen THE FUELS PROPANE • By-Product of Natural Gas • Compressed at high pressure to liquefy • Domestic Fuel Source • Great for: • School Busses • Step Vans • Larger Vans • Mid-Sized Vehicles COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) • Predominately Methane • Uses existing pipeline distribution system to deliver gas • Good for: • Heavy-Duty Trucks • Passenger cars • School Buses • Waste Management Trucks • DNREC trucks PROPANE AND CNG INFRASTRUCTURE • 8 Propane Autogas Stations • 1 CNG Station • Fleet and Public Access with accounts ELECTRIC VEHICLES • Electricity is considered an alternative fuel • Uses electricity from a power source and stores it in batteries • Two types: • Battery Electric • Plug-in Hybrid • Great for: • Passenger Vehicles EV INFRASTRUCTURE • 61 charging stations in Delaware • At 26 locations • 37,000 Charging Stations in the United States • Three types: • Level 1 • Level 2 • D.C. Fast Charging TYPES OF CHARGING STATIONS Charger Current Type Voltage (V) Charging Primary Use Time Level 1 Alternating 120 V 2 to 5 miles Current (AC) per hour of Residential charge Level 2 AC 240 V 10 to 20 miles Residential per hour of and charge Commercial DC Fast Direct Current 480 V 60 to 80 miles (DC) per 20 min.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 11 ) FISKER AUTOMOTIVE HOLDINGS, INC., Et Al.,1 ) Case No
    Case 13-13087-KG Doc 157 Filed 12/13/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) FISKER AUTOMOTIVE HOLDINGS, INC., et al.,1 ) Case No. 13-13087 (KG) ) Debtors. ) (Jointly Administered) ) MOTION OF THE DEBTORS FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (A) AUTHORIZING THE EMPLOYMENT AND RETENTION OF BEILINSON ADVISORY GROUP, LLC AS RESTRUCTURING ADVISORS FOR THE DEBTORS, EFFECTIVE NUNC PRO TUNC TO THE PETITION DATE AND (B) WAIVING CERTAIN TIME-KEEPING REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 2016-2(H) The above-captioned debtors (collectively, the “Debtors”) file this motion (the “Motion”) for entry of an order, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Order”): (a) authorizing the Debtors’ employment and retention of Beilinson Advisory Group, LLC and its subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and independent contractors (collectively, “BAG”), as their restructuring advisors in connection with these chapter 11 cases effective nunc pro tunc to the Petition Date (as defined below), including the engagement of Marc Beilinson as Chief Restructuring Officer; and (b) waiving certain time-keeping requirements pursuant to Local Rule 2016-2(h). In support of this Motion, the Debtors submit the Declaration of Marc Beilinson, the Debtors’ Chief Restructuring Officer (the “Beilinson Declaration”), attached hereto as Exhibit B. In further support of this Motion, the Debtors respectfully state as follows: 1 The Debtors, together with the last four digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, are: Fisker Automotive Holdings, Inc. (9678); and Fisker Automotive, Inc. (9075). For the purpose of these chapter 11 cases, the service address for the Debtors is: 5515 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript of August 4, 2020 Session 2 Commissioner Workshop on Plug
    DOCKETED Docket Number: 20-IEPR-02 Project Title: Transportation TN #: 235911 Transcript of August 4, 2020 Session 2 Commissioner Document Title: Workshop on Plug-in Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Description: N/A Filer: Cody Goldthrite Organization: California Energy Commission Submitter Role: Commission Staff Submission Date: 12/10/2020 3:21:05 PM Docketed Date: 12/10/2020 CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION In the matter of: 2020 Integrated Energy ) Docket No. 20-IEPR–02 Policy Report Update ) (2020 IEPR Update) ) _________________________) COMMISSIONER WORKSHOP ON PLUG-IN ELECTRIC VEHICLES CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE REMOTE VIA ZOOM SESSION 2: TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 2020 2:30 P.M. Reported by: Martha Nelson 1 California Reporting, LLC (510) 313-0610 APPEARANCES COMMISSIONERS Patricia Monahan, 2020 IEPR Update Lead Commissioner CEC STAFF Heather Raitt, IEPR Program Manager Jonathan Bobadilla PUBLIC ADVISOR RoseMary Avalos MODERATOR Tim Olson, California Energy Commission PRESENTER Paul Francis, KIGT Noel Crisostomo, California Energy Commission Micah Wofford, California Energy Commission PUBLIC COMMENT Lisa McGhee, GreenPower Motor Company Stacey Reineccius, Powertree Services, Inc. Nicholas Johnson, Orange Charger Rajiv Shah, FreeWire Technologies 2 California Reporting, LLC (510) 313-0610 AGENDA Page Introduction 4 Opening Remarks 5 Commissioner Monahan Chair Hochschild Commissioner McAllister Commissioner Douglas Fostering Advanced Technology to Meet Future 8 Light-Duty Vehicle Needs Paul Francis, KIGT Charging Equipment Hardware and Software 29 Noel Crisostomo, CEC EVSE Deployment and Grid Evaluation (EDGE) Tool 44 Micah Wofford, CEC Other Charging Programs to Accelerate Electric 61 Vehicle Adoption Noel Crisostomo, CEC Public Comments 87 Closing Comments 95 Adjourn 96 1 3 California Reporting, LLC (510) 313-0610 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 2: 30 P.M.
    [Show full text]
  • EPRI Journal--Driving the Solution: the Plug-In Hybrid Vehicle
    DRIVING THE SOLUTION THE PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLE by Lucy Sanna The Story in Brief As automakers gear up to satisfy a growing market for fuel-efficient hybrid electric vehicles, the next- generation hybrid is already cruis- ing city streets, and it can literally run on empty. The plug-in hybrid charges directly from the electricity grid, but unlike its electric vehicle brethren, it sports a liquid fuel tank for unlimited driving range. The technology is here, the electricity infrastructure is in place, and the plug-in hybrid offers a key to replacing foreign oil with domestic resources for energy indepen- dence, reduced CO2 emissions, and lower fuel costs. DRIVING THE SOLUTION THE PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLE by Lucy Sanna n November 2005, the first few proto­ vide a variety of battery options tailored 2004, more than half of which came from Itype plug­in hybrid electric vehicles to specific applications—vehicles that can imports. (PHEVs) will roll onto the streets of New run 20, 30, or even more electric miles.” With growing global demand, particu­ York City, Kansas City, and Los Angeles Until recently, however, even those larly from China and India, the price of a to demonstrate plug­in hybrid technology automakers engaged in conventional barrel of oil is climbing at an unprece­ in varied environments. Like hybrid vehi­ hybrid technology have been reluctant to dented rate. The added cost and vulnera­ cles on the market today, the plug­in embrace the PHEV, despite growing rec­ bility of relying on a strategic energy hybrid uses battery power to supplement ognition of the vehicle’s potential.
    [Show full text]