18-01-2017 Version 0.8
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
* From xkcd.com (http://xkcd.com/927/) 18-01-2017 Version 0.8 ElaadNL Utrechtseweg 310 Gebouw B42 6812 AR Arnhem | The Netherlands www.elaad.nl | [email protected] Design tables 1-4: Shapeshifter.nl Graphics figures 1, 8, 14 and 16-25: Marcel Nahapiet 1 Executive summary Based on its practical experience, ElaadNL has come across many different protocols within the Electrical Vehicle (EV) domain. The interaction supported by these protocols consists of exchanging information ranging from authorization identifications (ID) to charge point locations, but also of sending commands for charging control. In this study, a selection of protocols encountered by ElaadNL is discussed. These protocols and the relation to the different roles in the EV market are visualized in the figure below: In the figure above many protocols are shown, even multiple occurrences of the same protocol between different roles are visible. At different locations, the use of different combinations of protocols were found, including a number of different protocols for similar functionality. From ElaadNL’s role as a knowledge and innovation center in the field of EV charging, this study aims to give more insight in a set of protocols that is currently in use in Europe and to clarify their relationship to the electricity grid. This study addresses the question which (set of) protocol(s) is best applicable for which functionality in different types of situations. To be able to do this, this study also identifies for each of these protocols which functionalities it supports and how it scores on interoperability, maturity, market adoption and openness. This study has led to the following summary of use cases supported by the different protocols1: 1 O Operating Charge Point using 61850-90-8: only the basics Smart Charging in OCHP: only OCHPdirect and only basics Smart Charging in eMIP: only 1 OEM (so only 1 car brand) 2 The protocol score on the properties of interoperability, maturity, market adoption and openness is summarized in the following overview: This study also confirms that many combinations of protocols are possible, a number of which are discussed in this study. No combination of protocols is considered a “silver bullet” for all current and future situations. However, some main conclusions that can be drawn are that: the next step for roaming protocols seems to be the addition / extension of smart charging functionality. a choice is to be made whether point-to-point protocols or a clearing house type of communication is to be pursued, or perhaps both. an important smart charging aspect of 15118 is the retrieval of the state of charge. In some cases, this information can also be retrieved via OEM platforms but only through specific, non-standardized interfaces. For the short term a next step in the protocols related to smart charging, could be the addition of connections to different OEM platforms for getting this state of charge using an open standard. When looking at the current state of the protocols under consideration, it is recommended to put more work in the smart charging aspects of the existing roaming protocols and to take a next step in roaming platforms (e.g. connecting, merging). In order to accelerate the adoption of smart charging, the state of charge and time of departure are crucial pieces of information. For getting the state of charge it is recommended to focus on open protocols to include OEMs in the EV domain. In the longer term, the ISO / IEC 15118 protocol seems to be an alternative for this, this protocol however does not seem to be implemented in the short term. The first EV’s with ISO / IEC 15118 basic functionality (“plug & charge”) are expected in mid-2018. When the time of departure is needed, communication with the EV user might be necessary, either directly or via the EV (ISO / IEC 15118). A new protocol could be of use here, but this choice is left to the commercial parties in the EV market. If a protocol is desirable, an “open” 3 protocol should be preferred to avoid lack of adoption due to interoperability issues. When purely looking at protocols, communicating grid limits or dynamic prices is already possible. However, current legislation in most countries is not yet prepared for dynamic pricing or setting grid limits from a power system operator. It is recommended that this legislation is changed (perhaps even equalized) to make it possible to utilize the flexibility EVs have to offer to the energy transition. 4 Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 8 1.2 Intended audience ....................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Versions....................................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Definitions / abbreviations ...........................................................................................10 2. Research questions ...........................................................................................................12 3. Scope ................................................................................................................................12 4. Approach ...........................................................................................................................15 4.1 Use case based approach ..........................................................................................15 4.1.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................15 4.1.2 Reading guide .....................................................................................................15 4.1.3 Example ..............................................................................................................15 4.1.4 High level use cases ............................................................................................16 4.2 Limitations to the approach .........................................................................................17 4.3 Interoperability ............................................................................................................18 4.4 Market adoption ..........................................................................................................18 4.5 Maturity .......................................................................................................................18 4.6 Openness ...................................................................................................................18 4.7 Scoring EV related protocols .......................................................................................19 5. Protocol analysis ................................................................................................................20 5.1 Smart Charging ...........................................................................................................21 5.1.1 Open Smart Charging Protocol (OSCP) ...............................................................22 5.1.2 OpenADR 2.0 ......................................................................................................24 5.1.3 Open Charge Point Interface protocol (OCPI v0.4) ..............................................28 5.1.4 IEEE 2030.5 (IEEE Adoption of Smart Energy Profile 2.0 / SEP2) .......................30 5.1.5 Smart charging protocols overlap ........................................................................35 5.2 Central System – Charge Point ...................................................................................37 5.2.1 Open Charge Point Protocol (OCPP) ...................................................................38 5.2.2 IEC 61850-90-8 ...................................................................................................41 5.2.3 Central system – charge point protocol overlap ...................................................42 5.3 Roaming .....................................................................................................................44 5.3.1 Open Clearing House Protocol (OCHP) ...............................................................45 5.3.2 Open Charge Point Interface protocol (OCPI 2.1) ................................................48 5 5.3.3 Open InterCharge Protocol (OICP) ......................................................................52 5.3.4 eMobility Inter-Operation Protocol(eMIP) .............................................................54 5.3.5 Roaming protocols ...............................................................................................58 5.4 EV – Charge Point ......................................................................................................60 5.4.1 IEC 61851-1 ........................................................................................................61 5.4.2 ISO / IEC 15118...................................................................................................62 5.4.3 EV – Charge Point protocols overlap ...................................................................65 6. Protocol discussion ............................................................................................................66 6.1 Overview .....................................................................................................................67