E V Electric Vehicle Infrastructure for the Monterey Bay Area The Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments August 2013
The prepara on of this document was funded by a grant awarded by the Monterey Bay Unifi ed Air Pollu on Control District (MUAPCD), as part of the AB2766 program. Project Staff Alan Romero, Monterey Bay Unifi ed Air Pollu on Control District (MBUAPCD) AMBAG Dawn Mathes, Monterey County Resource Management Agency (RMA) Paul Hierling, Planner Carl P. Holm, Monterey County RMA Cody Meyer, Planner Craig Spencer, Monterey County RMA Anais Schenk, Planner Mario Salazar, Monterey County RMA Jason Adelaars, GIS Michael Ricker, City of Salinas Ecology Ac on Veronica Lezama, San Benito Council of Piet Canin, Vice President, Transporta on Governments Group Tegan Speiser, Santa Cruz County RTC Emily Glanville, Program Specialist Michael Zeller, TAMC Monterey Bay Unifi ed Air James Wasserman, Zero Motorcycles, Plug- Pollu on Control District In America Alan Romero, Air Quality Planner III Megan Tolbert, CSU Monterey Bay EV Communi es Alliance Piet Canin, Ecology Ac on Richard Corcoran, PEV Owner Richard Schorske, CEO Teresa Buika, UC Santa Cruz Previous staff contributors Richard Schorske, EV Communi es Alliance John Doughty Randy Deshazo, Principal Planner Linda Meckel, Planner, Project Manager
MBEVA Plug-In Electric Vehicle Coordina ng Council Sharon Sarris, Green Fuse Energy Kris Markey, Offi ce of Monterey County Supervisor Parker Andy Hartmann, Interna onal Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Cheryl Schmi , City of Santa Cruz
For more informa on regarding this study, contact Anais Schenk at [email protected]
2 E V Electric Vehicle Infrastructure for the Monterey Bay Area
Execu ve Summary...... 6 Acronyms & Glossary Terms ...... 8 Introduc on ...... 11 Why Electric Vehicles are Important to the Success of the Monterey Bay Region ...... 11 Mee ng Climate Change Goals and Diversifying the Transporta on Sector ...... 13 Why Have a Coordinated EV Infrastructure Plan ...... 14 The Role of Electric Vehicles in Transporta on in the Monterey Bay Area in 2035 ...... 14 State of the Industry ...... 17 Parking Infrastructure ...... 17 Cost of Owning an EV ...... 19 Early Adopter Market ...... 19 Electric Vehicle Driver Consumer Behavior ...... 20 Charing Infrastructure ...... 21 Peer-to-Peer Charging ...... 24 Current Ba ery Technology ...... 25 Vehicle Ac vity Intensity Analysis ...... 31 Methodology ...... 31 Limita ons of the Study ...... 35 Fleets ...... 38 Other Methods to Site EV Sta ons...... 39 Best Prac ces ...... 41 Infrastructure Rollout Plan ...... 45 AMBAG 2011 EV Charging Sta on Project ...... 45 Future EV Infrastructure Ac vi es ...... 48 Opera ons & Maintenance ...... 55 Opera on Business Models ...... 55 Charging System Maintenance ...... 58 Vehicle Maintenance ...... 58 Needs and Exis ng Resources for EV Success ...... 61 Federal & State Incen ves ...... 61 Municipal Policies and Codes ...... 61 Emergency Response Training ...... 63 Local Electric Vehicle Related Companies ...... 64 Local Support Groups ...... 64 Legisla ve Background ...... 69 State Legisla on ...... 69 Appendix A: Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas ...... 74 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix ...... 100 Bibliography ...... 118
3 Figures & Tables.
Figure 1. Importance of Factors Determining When PEV Drivers Charge ...... 20 Figure 2. All Electric Range Desired for Extreme Sa sfac on Among PEV Owners ...... 21 Figure 3. Example of how a Suitability Analysis works...... 31 Figure 4. Example of AMBAG input for the analysis...... 31 Figure 5. More examples of AMBAG input for the analysis...... 34 Figure 4. Priority Scores for the AMBAG Region...... 31 Figure 5. More examples of AMBAG input for the analysis...... 31 Figure 6. Poten al Charging Areas in the AMBAG Region ...... 35 Figure 7. More examples of AMBAG input for the analysis...... 35 Figure 8. UC Berkeley Global Venture Lab - User Model Personas, 2008...... 36 Figure 9. Parks and Recrea onal Areas in the Tri-County Area ...... 37 Figure 10. Poten al Sta on Loca ons for Filling Gaps in Exis ng Charging Infrastructure...... 37 Figure 11. Top 20 Employers in the Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Benito Coun es Area...... 31 Figure 12. Sta on Installa on...... 45 Figure 13. City of Salinas project Loca on and Site Plan ...... 46 Figure 14. City of Salinas Ini al Site Plan...... 46 Figure 15. City of Salinas Electrical Installa on Plan...... 47 Figure 16. Online Blink Map...... 47 Figure 17. The Sunset Center Sta on...... 47 Figure 18. Loca ons of Exis ng and Planned Sta ons in the Monterey Bay Area, June 2013...... 48 Figure 19. Graph of the Number of Chargers and Cost of Infrastructure...... 50 Figure 20. Analysis of diff erent available business models for EV payment systems...... 57 Figure 21. What Should Organiza ons Charge to Break Even? ...... 59 Figure 22. Example of Response Concepts from the Na onal Fire Protec on Associa on...... 62 Figure 23. Webpage for www.mbeva.org. This webpage was put together by Mike Zeller...... 65 Figure 24. Possible structure for a community outreach website for EVs...... 66 Figure 25. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Monterey Bay Area...... 74 Figure 26. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Monterey Bay ...... 75 Figure 27. Exis ng/Proposed Sta ons, Monterey Bay...... 76 Figure 28. Exis ng/Proposed Sta ons, Motnerey County...... 77 Figure 29. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Carmel-by-the-Sea ...... 78 Figure 30. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Carmel Valley Village ...... 79 Figure 31. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Del Rey Oaks ...... 80 Figure 32. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Castroville ...... 81 Figure 33. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Gonzales...... 82 Figure 34. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Greenfi eld...... 83 Figure 35. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, King City ...... 84 Figure 36. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Marina ...... 85
4 E V
Figure 37. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Monterey ...... 86 Figure 38. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Pacifi c Grove...... 87 Figure 39. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Salinas ...... 88 Figure 40. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Seaside and Sand City ...... 89 Figure 41. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Soledad ...... 90 Figure 42. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, San Benito County ...... 91 Figure 43. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Hollister ...... 92 Figure 44. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, San Juan Bau sta ...... 93 Figure 45. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Santa Cruz County ...... 94 Figure 46. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Capitola ...... 95 Figure 47. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, City of Santa Cruz ...... 96 Figure 48. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Sco s Valley ...... 97 Figure 49. Poten al Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Ac vity Intensity, Watsonville ...... 98 Table 1. Popula on & Daily VMT in the AMBAG Region ...... 6 Table 2. Daily VMT and GHG Emissions in the AMBAG region...... 11 Table 3. Emissions of Diff erent Types of Vehicles and Fuels...... 12 Table 4. Levels of Charging ...... 23 Table 5. Ba ery Types and Energy Performance...... 26 Table 5. Levels of Charging...... 21 Table 6. Data Collec on & Prepara on ...... 32 Table 7. Early Adopter/Phase I Refi nement Criteria ...... 32 Table 8. Input Values and Scores...... 33 Table 9. Other Weigh ng Evalua ons by Group ...... 34 Table 10. Number of Chargers Needed in the Monterey Bay Area in 2035...... 49 Table 11. Number of Chargers and Cost of Infrastructure...... 50 Table 12. Na onally funded EV Infrastructure Deployment Programs...... 52 Table 13. Business Model 1: Ev Promo on ...... 56 Table 14. Business Model 2: Pay-Parking Infrastructure Reliant ...... 56 Table 15. Business Model 3: Third Party Opera on ...... 57 Table 16. What Should Ci es Charge to Break Even? ...... 58 Table 17. Examples of Municipal Policies to Promote Electric Vehicles ...... 62 Table 18. Key Elements to meet AB 32...... 69 Table 19. The Climate Change Scoping Plan Recommended Mi ga on Measures...... 70
5 Execu ve Summary This plan outlines the process of crea ng a vehicle ac vity intensity analysis to If we are to meet this challenge, help iden fy poten al charging areas in the Monterey Bay Area. In addi on, where are the likely parking this document details the status of electric vehicle technology today, and places to “plug-in” to the suggests probable infrastructure requirements needed to electrify the electric grid, and what other transporta on sector in the Monterey Bay Area. requirements should be in place to meet the expected demand? In California, Execu ve Order B-16-2012 seeks to have over 1.5 million Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) on the road by 2025. The Electrifi ca on Coali on’s Electrifi ca on Roadmap1 suggests that to reduce the transporta on sector’s Table 1. Popula on & Daily VMT in the reliance on oil, 75 percent of light-duty vehicle miles traveled (VMT ) should be AMBAG Region electrifi ed by 2040. For the Monterey Bay Area, this would equate to more than 18 million daily miles driven by our residents. If we are to meet this challenge, on where are the likely places to “plug-in” to the electric grid, and what other requirements should be in place to meet the expected demand? 15 - 84 aged 15 - 84 aged Popula Daily VMT 75% Electric Daily VMT 2005 565,848 16,073,487 -- An electric vehicle (EV) operates almost exactly like an internal combus on 2010 599,100 17,565,221 -- engine (ICE) vehicle, except for the fuel source. Currently, EVs are in their 2035 722,735 24,394,889 18,296,167 infancy and are expected to have more effi cient ba eries in the future that will enable driving longer distances on one charge. The ICE has come a long way since Henry Ford’s Model T that had a 10 gallon tank and could only travel 130 miles before refueling. Even today, there are vehicles with extremely low The size of the fuel tank in an miles per gallon (MPG) that limits how far they drive before refuelling. The size ICE is analogous to the size of of the fuel tank in an ICE is analogous to the size of the ba ery in an EV, with the ba ery in an EV, with larger larger ba eries enabling vehicles to travel farther before recharging. As ba ery ba eries enabling vehicles to technology becomes more effi cient, as did the ICE, EVs will be able to travel travel farther before recharging. further per charge, changing the nature of the recharging process.
This plan takes into account the ba ery and EV standards that exist today, which equates roughly to a 24 kilowa hour (kWh) ba ery being able to travel The possible places for drivers 100 miles before having to recharge. How drivers recharge an EV is diff erent to refuel is not limited to a gas than refueling an ICE. The possible places for drivers to refuel are not limited to sta on because we currently gas sta ons because we can tap into an extensive exis ng electric grid to charge have an exis ng electric grid for vehicles. The me it will take to recharge or refuel is currently longer than the EVs to connect to. 10 minutes at the gas sta on, and is determined by the electrical connec on type (described in the State of the Industry sec on), which ranges from 30 minutes to 8 hours, with a standard of approximately 4 hours for a full charge.
The length of me to recharge an EV is considered to be a barrier to widespread EV adop on in the marketplace. However, by strategically placing charging infrastructure where EV drivers are parked for extended periods of 1 Electrifi ca on Coali on. (2009). Electrifi ca on Roadmap: Revolu onizing Transporta on and Achieving Energy Security. Washington, DC: Electrifi ca on Coali on. 6 E V
me, “range anxiety,” the fear of not being able to recharge, will be alleviated and even have economic development value. Therefore, understanding the behavior of poten al EV owners is paramount to this plan, and as such, this plan takes into considera on ac vity based charging behavior.
There is no reason that EVs would not be fully charged all the me if the charging sta ons are located where we already park our cars, given that approximately 95 percent of an automobile’s life is spent parked.2 The typical amount of me we spend driving a car is 1.2 hours a day – the rest of the me Approximately 95 percent of the the car is parked. Where we park our cars varies – from home, work, shopping me of an automobile is spent to recrea on loca ons. Our charging infrastructure should go in these same parked. loca ons.
The other components of EV infrastructure that should be considered are the support systems (mechanics, emergency response, electricians, and back offi ce network management), and the infl uences on the current power grid. Described throughout this plan are current theories with how to address these infrastructure needs. These vary from the me of day or me of use (TOU) people charge to take advantage of the exis ng electric supply, to coupling charging infrastructure and solar infrastructure.
Iden fying the best way to invest in electrifying our mobility is important. Oil prices con nue to increase, and many believe that we have in fact surpassed “peak oil,” and will not have enough oil for the next 50 to 100 years, especially as the demands from developed and developing countries increase. Moving the personal transporta on sector away from being en rely dependent on oil will alleviate this demand, and put our transporta on system on a path of greater sustainability.
The following pages outline the current state of the EV charging industry, and suggest a coordinated approach to strategically deploying public EV charging infrastructure in the Monterey Bay Area.
2 Shoup, Donald. 2005. The High Cost of Free Parking. Chicago, IL: American Planning Associa on. 7 Acronyms & Glossary Terms
AB 32 The California Global Warming Solu ons Act of 2006. Alterna ng Current; a type of electric power where the AC charge constantly and cyclically reverses direc ons. AFV Alterna ve Fuel Vehicle. AMBAG Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments. AMI Advanced Metering Infrastructure or Smart-Meters. Amperage, or the strength of an electrical current measured AMPs in amperes. BEV Ba ery Electric Vehicle. Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards; federal CAFE regula ons fi rst enacted in 1975 intending to improve the fuel effi ciency of cars and light trucks in the US. CARB California Air Resources Board. Direct Current. Electric power commonly found in ba eries DC where the electricity charge fl ows in one direc on. EPA Environmental Protec on Agency. EV Electric Vehicle.. EVSE Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment. E-REV GHG Greenhouse Gas Emissions. HV Hybrid Vehicle. ICE Internal Combus on Engine. Instantaneous The maximum electric demand at the instant of greatest Demand load. Kilowa ; a unit of power measurement. One wa is equal to kW one joule per second, and 1,000 wa s is 1 kW. kWh Kilowa hour; the number of kilowa s ac on for one hour. lbs Pounds. LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standards. Lithium Ion; a common rechargeable ba ery technology that Li-ion uses lithium as a catalyst. MBEVA Monterey Bay Electric Vehicle Alliance.
8 E V
MMTCO2E Million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent. MPG Miles per Gallon. MUAPCD Monterey Bay Unifi ed Air Pollu on Control District. NEV Neighborhood Electric Vehicle. Nickel Metal Hydride; a rechargeable ba ery technology NiMH that uses mineral nickel and a hydrogen storing ion. PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle. RFID Radio-Frequency Iden fi ca on. RTP Real-Time Pricing. Legisla on passed in 2008 manda ng the coordina on of SB 375 Land Use and Transporta on Planning to meet Greenhouse Gas Emissions targets. TOU Time-of-Use. Voltage; a measure of electric poten al that causes electric V energy to fl ow. V2G Vehicle-to-Grid. VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled. ZEV Zero Emissions Vehicle.
9 INTRODUCTION E V
E V
E V
10 E V
Introduc on Why Electric Vehicles are Important to the Success of the Monterey Bay Region In 2005 the region drove 16,075,936 miles a day. By 2035, this number is expected to reach 24,394,889 miles a day4. This equates to more pounds of pollutants entering the air in the Monterey Bay Area every day from the con nued consump on of gasoline to power these miles driven. Specifi cally, tables 2 and 3 indicate the rela on between gasoline derived vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and fuel sources and their related emissions.
Impacts to the air and water quality in the Monterey Bay Area from this increase in pollutants are driving the need to electrify vehicle miles. Even though EVs produce no tailpipe emissions the electricity used to power them does produce some. Even then, EVs charged in California in off -peak periods reduce greenhouse gas emissions 15% - 50%5.
Table 2. Projected VMT and GHG Emissions in the AMBAG region, 1990-2035
GHGs Daily Metric Tons Year Daily VMT CO2 CH4 N2OCO2e 1990 13,829,725 5,799.90 2.10 1.20 6,203.80 2005 16,073,487 6,147.61 0.92 0.52 6,322.38 2010 17,565,221 6,600.76 0.67 0.38 6,729.13 2020 20,876,159 7,787.85 0.38 0.22 7,861.67 2035 25,678,830 9,394.58 0.29 0.17 9,450.64 This table does not account for renewable electricity which would make EVs much more effi cient than ICEs. Source: (PMC, 2010)6
4 This number is reduced from the modeled 25,678,830 daily miles discussed in the 2010 MTP based on the AMBAG Board adopted -5% per capita reduc on in daily VMT, including interregional trips. 5 McCarthy, Ryan W. and Christopher Yang (2009), Determining Marginal Electricity for Near- term Plug-in and Fuel Cell Vehicle Demands in California: Impacts on Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Journal of Power Sources 195 (7), 2099–2109. 6 Gärling, Anita. 2000. “Market Segmenta on, Marke ng Communica on Strategies and Electric Vehicle Drive”. KFB-Rapport 2000: 18. PMC. (2010). Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: 2010 Monterey Bay Area Metropolitan Transporta on Plan. Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments. Monterey, CA: PMC. 11 Introduc on
Table 3. Emissions of Diff erent Types of Vehicles and Fuels. ciency (g/mile) (g/mile) ffi 2 2 Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon (g/mile) % E SO NOx (g/mile)NOx (g/mile)CO CO Vehicle Type/Fuel Gasoline 10.2 0.20 0.63 3.43 444 0.35 Methanol 8.5 0.86 1.71 408 0.35 One advantage of switching to Hydrogen 9.4 0.61 0.02 388 0.75 electric vehicles will be that the Natural Gas 10.8 0.40 1.70 337 0.16 power can come from a number of diff erent sources. Ethanol 8.1 0.04 0.52 1.90 44 0.13 EV by source power Coal 16.5 1.73 0.81 0.07 485 0.01 Petroleum 14.6 0.93 0.52 0.08 459 0.02 Natural Gas 15.1 0.52 0.09 302 0.01 Advanced Natural Gas 20.0 0.36 0.20 229 0.07 Nuclear 14.4 0.10 0.05 25 Source: (Gärling, 2000)7
Climate Protec on Implementa on Guidelines In addi on to degrading air and water quality, it is now commonly accepted that GHG emissions contribute to the overall warming of the global climate, and that human ac vi es have increased the rate of which we add GHGs to the atmosphere. As such, many local agencies have supported reducing the amount of GHGs they emit.
California Execu ve Order B-16-2012 In March 2012, Governor Brown issued an execu ve order direc ng state government to accelerate the market for zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) in California. Advancing electric-drive technologies is a cornerstone of California’s long-term transporta on strategy to reduce localized pollu on and greenhouse gas emissions. Key milestone goals include providing suffi cient ZEV charging infrastructure throughout the state to support 1.5 million vehicles by 2020, and pu ng over 1.5 million ZEVs on California’s roadways by 2025. This Execu ve Order directs state government to begin purchasing ZEVs. 10% of state departments’ light-duty fl eet purchases must be ZEVs by 2015, climing to 25% of light duty purchases by 2020.
7 Gärling, Anita. 2000. “Market Segmenta on, Marke ng Communica on Strategies and Electric Vehicle Drive”. KFB-Rapport 2000: 18. 12 E V
AMBAG Board In September 2010 the AMBAG board members adopted a regional GHG target of a 0% gain in per capita GHG emissions by 2020, and a 5% decrease in per capita GHG emissions by 2035.
U.S. Conference of Mayors: Mayors Climate Protec on Agreement (6 out of 18 ci es)8 The U.S. Conference of Mayors is a nonpar san organiza on of ci es with popula ons greater than 30,000. Through the Climate Protec on Center program, the U.S. Conference of Mayors’ Climate Protec on Agreement calls for mayors to vow that their ci es will reduce their carbon emissions to below 1990 levels in line with the Kyoto Protocol. Currently, six of the 1,044 mayors and former mayors who have signed the agreement are from the Monterey Bay Area. These include: • Capitola (Dennis Norton) • Marina (Bruce Delgado) • Monterey (Chuck Della Sala) • Pacifi c Grove (Daniel Cort) • Salinas (Dennis Donohue) It is in less urban areas that • Santa Cruz (Cynthia Mathews) electrifi ca on of the personal automobile makes the most Mee ng Climate Change Goals and Diversifying the sense. Transporta on Sector Each region in California must employ diff erent strategies in order to be successful in their eff orts to reduce GHG emissions from the transporta on sector. While some areas in California already have robust transit infrastructure and are se led in a manner that supports this infrastructure, much of California was built around the personal automobile and personal mobility. Even though transit infrastructure is, in the long run, much more cost eff ec ve due to the number of passengers it can support and its cost sharing benefi ts, redeveloping urban and rural environments where there isn’t transit infrastructure already can be costly and imprac cal. There are minimum land use densi es that are required to make opera on and maintenance of transit possible9 that many rural areas do not meet. It is in these areas that electrifi ca on of the personal automobile makes the most sense.
8 www.usmayors.org/climateprotec on/ci es.asp?state=CA 9 Pushkarev, Boris, and Jeff ery M. Zupan. 1977. Public Transporta on and Land Use Policy. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 13 Introduc on
The Monterey Bay Area has a unique land use pa ern with connec ons both to its own urban areas and adjacent major urban areas. Tourism, one of the main industry sectors in the Monterey Bay Area, draws automobile drivers from all Tourism, one of the main industry sectors in the Monterey over the U.S., but especially areas that would be considered within the current Bay Area, draws automobile range (100 miles) that an EV can travel. Currently, accessing the Monterey Bay drivers from all over the U.S., Area from outside the region is primarily done by personal automobile as the but especially areas that would region has few interregional transit connec ons. Therefore, it will be important be considered within the current to ensure that tourism centers include EV charging infrastructure as EVs are range (100 miles) that an EV can adopted by the Monterey Bay Area and other major urban areas, such as the travel. San Francisco Bay Area, which has an aggressive EV strategy.
Why Have a Coordinated EV Infrastructure Plan Historically, EV charging infrastructure has been mo vated by the EV owner – installing a sta on in their home, or by “green” mo va ons, such as LEED credits for buildings, and city endeavors to set an environmentally friendly tone. However, as with any infrastructure project, sharing infrastructure costs among mul ple individuals brings the cost of use down for all, and reduces redundant infrastructure. A coordinated EV infrastructure With the op mal situa on of being able to couple parking and charging plan will provide a framework infrastructure, travel distances and origin and des na on pa erns are for local governments seeking to expand transporta on important to consider when placing sta ons. Developing an op mal parking choices in their ci es, and and charging strategy will require coordina on with ci es and local u lity s mulate regional mobility and companies, as well as considering policies such as shared parking requirements accessibility. amongst businesses. Furthermore, a coordinated EV infrastructure plan will provide a framework for local governments seeking to expand transporta on choices in their ci es, and s mulate regional mobility and accessibility. Finally, much of the charging infrastructure is moving toward a networked approach, and a regionally coordinated infrastructure plan will have greater branding capabili es and will be more effi cient than each of the 21 ci es in the region having their own system.
The Role of Electric Vehicles in Transporta on in the Monterey Bay Area in 2035 In 2035 the Monterey Bay Area will have increased mobility for all residents while mee ng goals for reduced GHG emissions. The long range transporta on plan, Moving Forward Monterey Bay 2035, seeks to achieve a coordinated and balanced regional transporta on system that includes mass transporta on, highway, railroad, bicycle, pedestrian, goods movement and avia on facili es10. With the expansion of EVs throughout the country, new infrastructure components will become a part of our coordinated transporta on system,
10 AMBAG. 2010. Monterey Bay Area Mobility 2035. 14 E V and it will be important to ensure that transporta on choices con nue to grow. Currently many residents do not feel that they have a choice in the way they choose to travel – trips in the Monterey Bay Area are dominated single occupancy vehicles, most of which obtain their energy via gas. Expanding public charging infrastructure will help diversify the type of fuel that powers the personal automobile.
The future of transporta on will always include the personal automobile – it The task in the Monterey Bay was a great inven on that transformed the way ci es are built and how people Area will not only be to diversity interact with each other. However, the luxury of the personal automobile the modes by which we travel, and the costs associated with it are proving to be extremely high, and these but the fuel sources that enable costs will con nue to grow as oil becomes scarcer. As with any strategic plan, movement as well. diversifying a por olio of op ons is usually the best way to invest in the future. The task in the Monterey Bay Area will not only be to diversity the modes by which we travel, but the fuel sources that enable mobility as well.
Throughout the U.S. and the world, the evolu on of the personal automobile will include a movement towards electric powered vehicles and eventually drivers may not even have to plug into a sta on because charging infrastructure will be incorporated into road infrastructure. Being ready to adopt changes will be paramount to the success of the transporta on system in the Monterey Bay Area, and the greater mobility of its residents.
15 ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE E V
E V
E V
16 E V
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure The electric vehicle industry and its suppor ng infrastructure technology is evolving at a rapid pace. The informa on presented in this sec on represents the best available informa on and best prac ces available at the me of this report.
Parking Infrastructure In order to reduce the possibility of EV drivers running out of ba ery charge on long trips, charging infrastructure will have to be strategically placed at parking spaces where people tend to leave their car for extended periods of me. In the private realm this means installing charging sta ons at residen al loca ons and at employer provided parking facili es. These applica ons are easy to manage since the facility is private and the charging popula on is stable. However, charging sta ons that are intended for public use require more complex business models. MBEVA lists charging sta ons throughout the tri-county area on the ReCargo website (h p://www.recargo.com/) as they become available. This service provides EV drivers with a centralized search when they are seeking a place to charge.
Private Infrastructure Given the number of hours spent sleeping and working, our cars are parked for most of the day. These mes of the day provide the opportunity to charge a vehicle. Level I and II EVSEs can be installed in residen al se ngs with slight modifi ca ons to exis ng electrical systems. Installa on of an EV charger does require a permit. EVSEs can also be easily installed in exis ng employer owned parking facili es. In both these cases the infrastructure would be owned and operated by the person or company responsible for the maintenance of the property. In residen al single family home loca ons the user would pay for the electricity and maintenance costs.
Residen al charging is the most ubiquitous way of charging for PEV owners. Approximately 90% of PEV drivers reported having a dedicated Level II (240 V) residen al vehicle charger, and most PEV owners who charge their vehicle at home charge between 6pm and 8am.11 The advantages of charging at home include low electricity costs, no fees, and convienience. Results from the California Center for Sustainable Energy survey elaborate:
For PEV owners in California using standard residen al electricity rates, the average cost of electricity used to fuel their PEVs can be as high as $0.24–$0.34 per kilowa hour (kWh), equivalent to $2.70–$4.70 per gallon of gasoline. However, lower costs are available because u li es across the state are providing customers with rates exclusively for PEVs that u lize me-of-use (TOU) pricing. TOU pricing off ers cheaper
11 California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE), “California Plug-in Electric Vehicle Driver Survey Results,” May, 2013. 17. 17 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
rates during off -peak hours when electricity demand is low and more expensive rates during on-peak hours when there is a greater demand for electricity.12
Most early PEV adopters in California use the TOU electricity rate provided by their u lity.13
Apartment buildings require a diff erent arrangement. There are charging sta ons available that allow access only to users with a unique user pin. These sta ons making tracking use simple and they are within the same price range as other charging sta ons.14 Owners of apartment buildings can install the EVSEs in exis ng parking facili es and distribute pin numbers to ensure that only residents of the building can charge their vehicles. The pins allow the owner to iden fy who is using the charging sta on and to charge that account or person accordingly. Employers have similar technology available to them that would allow the company to issue codes for the sta ons to ensure that only employees are able to use the employer subsidized infrastructure. Another op on for mul -family residen al developments is to develop partnerships with nearby businesses to install charging sta ons.
Public Level II and Level III charging are most appropriate for public use, where people Level II and Level III charging are are parked for shorter periods of me, because of their ability to deliver a charge most appropriate for public use, quickly. At the me of this study Level III charging is s ll in tes ng and there are where people are parked for very few installed sta ons. There are s ll safety concerns with using direct current shorter periods of me in public loca ons and most EVs on the road are not compa ble with Level III charging. Therefore, Level II charging is currently the most prac cal applica on for commercial and public use.
Public use sta ons require a few more considera ons than private sta ons do. First, they must be placed in loca ons where people are likely to park for an hour or more in order for the vehicle to receive a signifi cant charge. They also must have a convenient mechanism for payment if payment is required. There are EVSE manufacturers that provide membership cards which allow a user to access the electrical connec on. These chargers would require a user to swipe their membership card or call a toll free number if they want to use a credit card. There are also EVSEs that allow the user to swipe their card without calling for access.
There are currently three categories of business models being used for public charging sta ons. In one model the local jurisdic on provides the infrastructure for free public use and absorbs the cost of opera ons and maintenance. In the second model, the EVSEs are connected to paid parking infrastructure. The user 12 CCSE 15 13 Ibid. 14 Sebas an Blanco, “Greenlings: What realis c electric vehicle recharging op ons are there for apartment dwellers?” h p://green.autoblog.com/2010/03/18/greenlings-what-realis c- electric-vehicle-recharge-op ons-are/ (accessed August 25, 2010). 18 E V pays for parking and use of the electric charger simultaneously. In the third model the charging sta ons are installed as their own networked system. They are owned by the jurisdic on, but maintained by a third party. These networked sta ons allow the user to pay for use of the sta on in places where parking is free. The sta ons collect data and store it on the network where it can later be retrieved by the owner of the infrastructure.
Cost of Owning an EV Electric vehicle technology is rapidly improving to bring down the cost of owning an electric vehicle. However, currently the ownership cost of EVs are high. A majority of the s cker price can be a ributed to the ba ery. There are also components of an EV that do not exist in an internal combus on (IC) vehicle, just as there are components of an IC vehicle that are not used in an electric car. However, the ba ery in an EV can account for up to $18,000 of the vehicle cost. There is a federal tax credit available for up to $7,500 that helps to shorten the payback period for purchasing an EV, but even with this credit that payback me is s ll es mated to be 7-8 years.15 In addi on to purchasing the vehicle consumers will likely want to pay for the infrastructure to charge at home. If there is no electrical panel upgrade required, the cost can range from $500-$1,500. If an upgrade is required the installa on cost could be as much as $2,500.16
Despite these costs, the electricity used to power the vehicle is signifi cantly cheaper than gasoline. To fully charge a 30 kWh ba ery it would cost $6.00 assuming a conserva ve es mate of $.20 kWh. Addi onally, EVs are more effi cient at conver ng energy into power. If you were to convert gasoline to energy using kilowa hour (kWh), 10 gallons of gasoline provides 360 kWh of usable energy. However, because IC engines are so ineffi cient only 20%, or 72 kWh, of this energy is captured. 17
The Early Adopter Market There is a specifi c market for drivers who are ready and willing to buy electric vehicles. Poten al early adopters of electric vehicles are generally well educated, high income individuals and are environmentally conscious. A University of Michigan study found that other factors likely to infl uence a person’s choice to purchase an EV are gas prices, access to an a ached garage, the number of miles driven and whether those miles are street or highway miles.18 Residents living in the west and northwest of the United States are more likely to purchase an EV than other regions. Whether a person lives in a suburb or city center does not have a signifi cant eff ect on the likelihood of purchasing an EV. However, people 15 Electrifi ca on Coali on, 79. 16 Pacifi c Gas and Electric Company, “Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Installa on Guide,” (March, 1999), 21. 17 Electrifi ca on Coali on, “Electrifi ca on Roadmap: Revolu onizing Transporta on and Achieving Energy Security,” (November, 2009), 74. 18 Richard Cur n, Yevgeny Shrago, and Jamie Mikkelsen, “Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles” 19 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
living in rural areas are least likely to favor purchasing an EV.
Electric vehicle technology is progressing at an increasingly rapid rate. Once the costs for ba ery produc on are reduced, EVs with become a more viable alterna ve for a wider range of people. While the early adopter market is limited, it is expected that within the next fi ve to ten years the market range of people willing to invest in an EV will broaden.
Electric Vehicle Driver Consumer Behavior The possibility of EV drivers running out of ba ery charge on long trips and the associated concern is known as “range anxiety”. Running out of charge on a long trip would leave PEV drivers stranded, causing a major inconvenience for the driver. Nearly 40% of PEV owners expressed some level of dissa sfac on with their vehicle’s all-electric range and 90% wanted to have a vehicle range above 100 miles.19 57% of PEV drivers expressed a desired range of 150 miles or greater (Figure 1).20 This exceeds the rated range of nearly all ba ery electric vehicles currently on the market. While PEV owners want the ability to travel a longer distance on one charge, they do not generally travel such long distances on a daily basis. Two-thirds (67%) of PEV owners who use their vehicle on a daily basis drive an average of only 35.2 miles per day.21 This suggests that PEV drivers don’t necessarily need a long range on their vehicle but, nonetheless, want their vehicle range to be comparable to that of a conven onal internal combus on vehicle. As current PEV range is not sa sfactory for most drivers, a comprehensive charger network can help mediate this problem.
Figure 1. Importance of Factors Determining When PEV Drivers Charge.
19 CCSE 3 20 Ibid. 21 Davids, Dan. Plug In America., “Web-based Electric Vehicle Consumer Survey”. May 4, 2010. 20 E V
PEV drivers are extremely cost sensi ve when it comes to public and workplace charging. In the CCSE study, the most important factor in determining when respondents charge is cost, which 53% rated as extremely important, and 28% rated as somewhat important (Figure 2).22 67% of respondents were willing to pay up to $1 per hour for occasional public charging.23 When the price of charging was raised to above $1 per hour, the propor on of PEV drivers willing to pay to occasionally use public charging went down drama cally. Less than 33% were willing to pay up to $1.50 per hour.24 For daily charging, 43% were willing to pay $1 per hour of charging, while only 16% were willing to pay up to $1.25 per hour.25 People willing to pay more for occasional charging, but in all situa ons, do not want to pay more than $1 per hour to charge. If EV charging infrastructure is expected to be u lized, charging fees must be kept to a maximum of $1 per hour. However, at this rate, and with future energy cost increases, charging sta on providers will be taking a loss. Going forward, there needs to be a sustainable long-term pricing strategy for charging infrastructure to make it feasible for consumers and providers.
Figure 2. All Electric Range Desired for Extreme Sa sfac on Among PEV Owners
Charging Infrastructure Infrastructure to support EVs has limited availability compared to the suppor ng infrastructure for internal combus on engine vehicles. In developing charging sta on technology studies show that the majority of charging will take place at the consumer’s home during the night hours when the car is typically idle. In two studies, 77-90% of PEV owners indicated they have installed a residen al charger, indica ng that home charging is an important to PEV consumers.26 81% of PEV owners indicated a majority 22 CCSE 3 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid. 17, Plug-In 5 21 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
of charging takes place at home.27 While most PEV charging takes place at home, there s ll exists a need for convenient charging sta ons outside of the consumer’s home. To alleviate “range anxiety,” charging sta ons outside of the A barrier to increased charging away from home is poor public infrastructure. A home should be available. These study by the California Center of Sustainable Energy found that 77% expressed public sta ons should be placed dissa sfac on with public charging infrastructure.28 94% of PEV owners also where people already park their own a conven onal vehicle, indica ng that they do not use PEVs for long trips, cars, this way, no extra me or and would rather keep a conven onal vehicle on hand for those instances.29 miles will be spent looking for a This is related to the extended me it takes to charge a PEV with the more place to re-charge. common Level I and II chargers, and the scarcity of Level III fast charging infrastructure. Unlike gas sta ons, EV charging sta ons will have to be located in places where a consumer can leave their vehicle for hours at a me. A lack of Level III charging and limited compa bility with Level III chargers among exis ng PEVs makes longer mul -hour charging a necessity. Standardiza on of these sta ons will be necessary to ensure consistent charging availability and network interoperability.
Electrical Power Supply Accommoda ng charging sta ons with regard to electrical infrastructure would be a rela vely simple process and highly benefi cial to u lity companies. U li es have the genera ng capacity to serve EVSEs during the early stages of deployment.30 However, neighborhood transformers would have to be upgraded to handle the addi onal demand of plugging in an EV. An electric vehicle charging with a Level II EVSE at 220 V on a 15 amp circuit can draw 3.3 kilowa s of power, the equivalent of a typical household.31 Although the largest demand would take place during off peak hours, an addi onal two or three charging sta ons could exceed the abili es of a typical neighborhood transformer. Therefore it is important to iden fy the parking loca ons of EVs so u lity companies can upgrade the necessary transformers. Commercial Level III charging sta ons will require three-phase power, which is typically reserved for heavy load use. U lity companies will have to work with the owners or operators of the charging sta ons to ensure that upgrades to the system will deliver enough power to the sta on without eff ec ng neighboring electrical users. Level III charging is not expected to occur at a large scale in the early phases of deployment.
U lity companies will also need to upgrade so ware and IT requirements in order to allow management of load demand. The capacity to turn vehicle chargers on and off will allow the u lity to shape demand and prevent 27 Plug-In 6 28 CCSE 7 29 Ibid. 4 30 Electrifi ca on Coali on, 101. 31 Ibid. 22 E V overloading. Monitoring use of charging infrastructure will also allow u lity companies to use price signals to shape demand. The technology used to manage EVs is in line with other smart grid upgrades and could be integrated into the movement towards a smart grid system.
Charging Sta ons The term charging sta on is misleading, technically the charger is located on the vehicle. The charging infrastructure, referred to as electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), is a set of cords with safety features integrated in a box that interfaces with the vehicle. There are three levels of charging provided by EVSEs.
Level I EVSEs can be used with standard 110 volt plug and a dedicated 15 amp circuit. These EVSEs can be installed for home use without many changes to Table 4. Levels of Charging. exis ng electrical. However, at 1.8 kW a 30 kWh ba ery could take 15 hours to fully charge.32 Typical Average Type Energy Time to Level II EVSEs use 240 volts and have to be mounted and wired to an electrical Output Fully Charge panel. This level of EVSE reduces charging me to between four and eight hours Level I 110V/15amp 8+ hours depending on the size of the ba ery in the vehicle. Both level I and level II Level II 240V/30amp 4-6 hours EVSEs use the same type of connec on to the vehicle. Level III 30kW to 15 - 30 min (DC Fast) 250kW via a to 80% full Level III EVSEs charge the vehicle using a diff erent type of technology, called direct current charge direct current (DC). DC is intended for commercial applica ons and ranges from 30 kW to 250 kW. The goal for charging me is ten minutes using DC EVSEs. This technology is in its infancy. Only one sta on has been installed and it is located in Vacaville, California, roughly half way between San Francisco and Sacramento. It should be noted that not all EVs are compa ble with Level III fast chargers, espeically the pre-2010 genera on of electric vehicles. In the Monterey Bay Area, the Santa Cruz Regional Transporta on Commission has grant funding from the Monterey Bay Unifi ed Air Pollu on Control District to install a DC fast charger within Santa Cruz County. The loca on for this charger has yet to be determined.
Connector Standardiza on The point where the vehicle connects to an EVSE, or the connector, has yet to be standardized globally. There are two widely used types of connectors at the J1772 is the new standardized moment: IEC 62196-2 Type 1 (the Japanese/SAE J1772 proposal) and the IEC connector, that has a fi ve pin 62196-2 Type 2 proposal (Europe). Auto manufacturers Audi, BMW, Daimler, connector that can deliver either Porsche and Volkswagen are proponents of adop ng a global standard that is a 120 V or 240 V. varia on of the Type 2 proposal. Their design would include an extension for DC charging.33
32 Electrifi ca on Coali on, 91. 33 Green Car Congress, “ German Auto makers Propsing Integrated Global Standard for a Modular Connector System for EV Charging.” h p://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/09/ 23 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
In 2010, the Society of Automo ve Engineers (SAE) approved the J1772 standardized connector, or Type 1 proposal, for EV charging. The standard is to be a fi ve pin connector that can deliver either 120 V or 240 V. The standard applies to North America only and covers the general physical, electrical, communica on protocol, and performance requirements for the electric vehicle conduc ve charge system and coupler. By standardizing the vehicle inlet and ma ng connector, drivers are assured that their vehicles can be charged at any charging sta on.
Induc ve Charging Another technology being explored for charging EVs is connec on-less. Induc ve charging uses electromagne c fi elds to pass electricity wirelessly between two coils. In this case one coil is located in the charging sta on and the other is placed in the vehicle charge receptor. Since there are no exposed electrical connectors, induc ve charging is actually safer than direct wired contact. However, the energy transfer is less eff ec ve than direct current. Be er Place and other charging manufacturers have already started integra ng the technology into charging sta on design. In road charging has also been explored by Be er Place and other companies such as IAV and HaloIPT. Placing charging systems under roads would allow people to charge in spurts as they pass over a road segment. A road charging system would extend range as well as ease drivers’ fear of running out of a charge. While the technology has already been developed, the cost of retrofi ng exis ng infrastructure with road charging systems may be prohibi ve. IAV has also noted that the system can be highly sensi ve to the distance between the road and the vehicle fl oor plan.34 Due to the high costs of installing new road infrastructure on a wide scale, it is more likely that this technology will be introduced in a limited capacity, such as on road segments that run electric trams or buses.
Peer-to-Peer Charging Peer-share charging sta ons have the poten al to supplement the exis ng The typical range of a current charging network. Peer share charging allows EV owners to make their home market electric vehicle is three charging sta ons available to the public through services such as PlugShare to fi ve miles per kWh of energy (h p://www.plugshare.com). The advantage of this system is that it provides a density. For a 100 mile range good method to provide a wider network of chargers to EV drivers un l more an EV would need a ba ery comprehensive public EV charging infrastructure is in place. The disadvantage capacity of 25 kWh. of this approach is that quality control and charger availability may not be as consistent as public charging infrasture. Addi onally, charging sta on providers may opt out of the program at any me, making reliability a poten al issue. While this approach should not be the core of a regional charging program, it can provide valuable services to areas underserved by other public charging
charging-20100916.html (accessed November 15, 2010). 34 All Cars Electric, “ German Firm Says Induc ve Road Charging Of Vehicles Only 2-3 Years Away.” h p://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1036051_german-fi rm-says-induc ve-road- charging-of-vehicles-only-2-3-years-away (accessed November 16, 2010). 24 E V infrastructure.
Exis ng Vehicles The market for electric vehicles is growing as are the number of vehicles available. Many manufacturers are beginning to produce an electric vehicle to lower their overall fl eet fuel effi ciency average. As the variety of electric vehicles increases the number of choices for ba ery type, range, top speed and other specifi ca ons also increase. In general, the greater the range of the vehicle the higher the cost of purchasing the vehicle. Higher vehicle range is dependent on the type and size of the ba ery in the vehicle and the larger the capacity of the ba ery the more expensive it is. Please see Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix for a table of the electric vehicles currently available in the United States and European markets. To see new vehicles that may not be included in the appendix, visit: h p://www.driveclean.ca.gov/ 75 kilowa s is equal to h p:// www.pluginamerica.org/vehicles 100 horsepower.
Current Ba ery Technology Indicators The key indicators for measuring ba ery performance according to the United States Advanced Ba ery Consor um are power, energy, safety, life and cost. Power, measured in kilowa s, is the rate of energy transfer from the ba ery Cost is one of the most to the wheels. Higher power rates aff ord the vehicle greater accelera on important indicators propulsion. If you were to convert kilowa s to horsepower, 75 kilowa s is equal for making EVs a viable to 100 horsepower.35 Power is o en confused with energy. The energy indicator consumer product. refers to the ba ery’s energy capacity and the length of me the ba ery can remain in a charge deple ng mode.
Because ba eries store energy and rely on vola le compounds safety is also a major concern and therefore an important indicator of ba ery performance. The life indicator is measured by both calendar life and cycle life. The calendar life refers to the ba ery’s ability to perform well over me, independent of use. The cycle life measures the number of mes a ba ery can be charged before other indicators such as energy and power are compromised. Finally, cost is one of the most important indicators for making EVs a viable consumer product. Cost varies based on the ba ery manufacturer and its components. Factors such as labor and capital expenses infl uence a ba ery’s produc on cost just as chemistry and technology investment do. Addi onally, there is an economy of scale issue at play: to reduce the cost of output, ba eries have to be produced in greater quan es.
35 Electrifi ca on Coali on, 74. 25 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
Exis ng Ba ery Technology Tradi onally, the automo ve industry used a lead acid ba ery. These ba eries were appealing because they provide short burst of high currents, which is needed to start a tradi onal internal combus on system. Lead acid ba eries are also inexpensive to produce at $100 to $200 per kilowa hour. However, these ba eries are heavy and are ineffi cient at delivering energy. The next ba ery technology improvement was a switch to nickel metal hydride (NiMH). NiMH ba eries outperform the tradi onal ba ery on every indicator, except for cost. These ba eries were used in the fi rst genera on of electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles.
Common Ba ery Types More recently, the focus on ba ery technology has shi ed to lithium-ion • Lead Acid ba eries. Lithium-ion provide be er energy and power density, therefore • Nickel Metal Hydride enabling manufacturers to place ba eries with long ranges into vehicles • Lithium Ion without the same weight and size burdens of previous ba ery types. Lithium- • Lithium Polymer ion ba eries are also the most expensive to produce with an average industry- 36 • Sodium-Nickel Chloride wide cost of $600 per kWh. • Nickel-Cadmium In the development of ba eries there is typically a trade off between power and energy. The more power density a ba ery has, the less energy density it has. In other words, the be er accelera on it provides (power), the quicker the deple on of the charge (energy). Energy is measured in wa hours per kilogram (Wh/kg) and power is measured in wa s per kilogram (W/kg). The lithium ion ba eries perform be er than other tradi onal ba eries on both measures.
Table 5. Ba ery Types and Energy Performance. Energy Power Life Density Density (w/ Cycles per Ba ery Type (Wh/kg) kg) Ba ery Current lead acid 35 150 500 Advanced Lead Acid 48 150 800 GM Ovonic Nickel-Metal Hydride 70 220 600 SAFT Nickel-Metal Hydride 70 150 1,500 SAFT Lithium Ion 120 230 600 Lithium Polymer 150 350 600 Zebra Sodium-Nickel Chloride 86 150 1,000 USABC mid-term goals 80 150 600 USABC long-term goals 200 400 1,000
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, 2010.
The lithium-ion ba ery has mixed results with regard to the life indicator. There is no market data available on ba ery life, though there has been extensive
36 Electrifi ca on Coali on, 75. 26 E V laboratory tes ng. In California, regula ons require that manufacturers warranty ba ery life for 10 years or 100,000 miles. A lithium-ion ba ery’s health is compromised when they are deeply discharged or when they are kept at a high charge for a long period of me. To counter this eff ect, manufacturers over-specify ba ery capacity to maintain a reserve at the top and low ends of the charge and achieve the 10 year life requirement. This prac ce of over- specifying ba ery life or energy density adds a signifi cant costs to the ba ery. One of largest hurdles to Temperature can also aff ect the life of a ba ery. Ba eries need to be kept cool overcome for the EV industry is not only while in opera on, but while idle as well. A study by the Na onal the cost to the consumer, and Renewable Energy Laboratory showed that raising the ambient temperature by ba eries cons tute a signifi cant 20○C to 30○C can cut in half the me it takes for a ba ery to lose 30 percent of por on of the total cost of an EV. its power density.37
Ba ery Cost Currently, one of largest hurdles to overcome for the EV industry is the cost to the consumer. Ba eries cons tute a signifi cant por on of the cost of an EV. With an industry average of $600 per kWh, that translates to an $18,000 ba ery.38 The raw material is the most expensive part of ba ery produc on. While the chemistries vary, nickel and cobalt are typically used with lithium to form the cathodes of a ba ery, which are the largest contributor to ba ery cost. Much of the EV ba ery industry research is geared at changing the chemistry of ba eries to reduce the cost of the raw material components.
Addi onally, some have made the argument that, like oil, dependency on a foreign non-renewable resource such as lithium puts the country at risk and could create a market with rising lithium costs. However, lithium, is a renewable resource in that it can be recycled, even though it is true that is also a resource held by only a few countries. Ensuring a safe and adequate supply of lithium during the ini al phases of produc on will be important to acquiring a longer term recyclable supply of the resource. The Electrifi ca on Coali on has emphasized the importance of recycling lithium for the long-term benefi t of the consumer and the market. Currently, lithium used in consumer electronics is not recycled.39
An addi onal contribu ng factor to the cost of ba eries is the scale of produc on. A manufacturing plant that produces 10,000 units per year will have costs as much as 60 to 80 percent higher than a plant that produces 100,000 packs per year.40 Un l EVs are produced on a large scale and market demand increases for ba eries, large scale produc on of these ba eries is unlikely to happen. Therefore manufacturing capacity will con nue to 37 Ahmad A Pesaran, Na onal Renewable Energy Laboratory, “Ba ery Pack Thermal Issues and Solu ons for PHEVs,” presenta on given at Plug-in 2009, Long Beach, CA. 38 Electrifi ca on Coali on, 79. 39 ibid., 80. 40 ibid., 86. 27 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
contribute to the high costs of purchasing an EV.
Range Th e range of an electric vehicle is highly dependent on the ba ery technology, though other standard driving condi ons, such as climate, terrain, and driving style, play a role in EV range just as they do with the mileage of an internal combus on engine vehicle. The typical range of a current market electric vehicle is three to fi ve miles per kWh of energy density.41 For a 100 mile range an EV would need a ba ery capacity of 25 kWh. Many of the EVs on market have a ba ery specifi ca on of 30 kWh. Manufacturers build a reserve into ba eries to prevent deep discharging of the ba ery and maintain a 10 year ba ery life as required by California regula ons. To see the wide variety of range available in current EVs see Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix.
28 41 ibid., 77. E V
29 POTENTIAL STATION AREAS E V
E V
E V
30 E V
Vehicle Ac vity Intensity Areas The following analysis is one way to iden fy poten al loca ons for EV charging Ques on: infrastructure, but it is by no means the only way to iden fy good charging Where are the areas in the sites. While this methodology iden fi es convenient loca ons in popula on Monterey Bay Area where centers, it does not iden fy poten al charging areas in more rural areas, nor people are already parking to does it iden fy gaps between popula on centers where charging sta ons might engage in ac vi es where they be well placed to serve remote highway loca ons and long distance PEV drivers. leave their car parked for at least The following sec on describes the methodology used to iden fy poten al two hours? sites for charging sta ons within popula on centers.
Methodology Figure 3. Example of how a vehicle ac vity intensity analysis works. The underlying assump on of this analysis is that EV charging infrastructure should be conveniently located where exis ng vehicles congregate. EV drivers are expected to follow the same pa erns of conven onal vehicle drivers, commu ng to and from work, running errands, and visi ng business centers. In order to determine poten al areas for electric vehicle charging sta ons, a vehicle ac vity intensity analysis was developed to iden fy where exis ng vehicles are parked for 1-3 hours per day. This analysis was accomplished through a systema c, mul -factor analysis from a set of model inputs.
This sec on outlines the results of eff orts to model areas of ac vity, popularity, and places where it is reasonable to assume that an EV owner would be for one to three hours, or enough me to receive a signifi cant charge at a Level 2 charging sta on. For much of the Monterey Bay Area, parking for two to three hours in downtown areas or other ac vity is allowed, and would support this charging me frame. One company, eTec has been developing general guidelines for charging sta on areas within the Pacifi c Northwest. They include as loca ons where EV owners are parked for one to three hours as being restaurants, theaters, shopping malls, governmental facili es, hotels, amusement parks, public parks, sports venues, arts produc ons, museums, libraries, outlet malls, airport visitor lots and major retail outlets.29 The following methodology seeks to determine these one to three hour ac vity loca ons within the Monterey Bay Area, to fi nd places where EV owners Figure 4. Example of AMBAG input for would likely need to park and par ally charge their vehicles. These are popular the analysis. des na ons for all vehicle types, and placing EV charging infrastructure in these areas will alow EV drivers to use their cars just like mainstream vehicles. The following data inputs were used in the suitability analysis:
• ESRI Business Analyst 2008 (infoUSA, Inc., ESRI, 2009)30 • Assessor Parcels (Coun es of Monterey, San Benito, Santa Cruz) • AMBAG Regional Travel Demand Model 2005 (Associa on of Monterey 29 Electric Transporta on Engineering Corpora on (eTec), April 2010 30 infoUSA, Inc., ESRI. (2009, 5 15). ArcGIS 9.3.1 Business Analyst . Readlands , CA, USA: ESRI. 31 Poten al Sta on Areas
Bay Area Governments, 2005)31 » Road Network » Traffi c Analysis Zones 31 Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments. (2005). Regional Travel Demand Model fi les. Table 6. Data Collec on & Prepara on Model Parameter Ini al Data and Treatment Since no precise data exists on exis ng parking loca ons, streets with parking (as designated in the AMBAG Exis ng Parking model), and business loca ons (which assumes that businesses have parking due to current zoning regula ons) Loca ons are used as a proxy. Addi onal data, in the form of Impervious Surfaces, would make this por on of the model more accurate. • Assessor Parcels for Businesses with a NAICS classifi ca on of 71 (Arts, Entertainment and Recrea on) were selected. Ac vity Loca ons • Library loca ons were geocoded, and assessor parcels selected. • NAICS codes were also used to determine the loca ons for Food and Beverage Stores, Food Service businesses, and Grocery Stores. Business Districts were determined using the Kernel Density func on in GIS. Points from the ESRI Business High Visibility Analyst data set were used to determine clusters of businesses, which were weighted by the number of Loca ons employees for that business. The “point density” func on was also used to compare the two outputs. Tourism A ractors TAZs where “visitors” are a racted were selected. These TAZs have one or more tourist a rac ons. Distance from State Routes and Highways in the region were buff ered with a 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 mile radius. Highway The daily volume for each road segment, as determined by the AMBAG regional travel demand model, was used as the basis for the Line Density func on in ArcMap. This func on essen ally was used to approximate the Route popularity popularity of the area around the road segment. This technique takes into account the fact that the des na ons are not on the roads themselves, but in the vicinity of said road segment. Gas Sta on Assessor Parcels for Businesses with a NAICS classifi ca on of 447 (Gasoline Sta ons) were selected. Loca ons From NAICS employer classes (A-I), classes E-I were selected. This includes all Business Parcels with greater than Large Employers 50 employees. Table 7. Early Adopter/Phase I Refi nement Criteria: Model Parameter Ini al Data and Treatment Demographics High Household Income areas (by TAZ) Cars per Acre (by TAZ) CEC Grant Addresses of businesses were geo-located and joined to their associated parcels. Applicant Business Exis ng Sta on Using la tude and longitude inputs from the EVChargerMaps (EV Charger News, 2009)1, the exis ng sta on Loca ons loca ons were geocoded. Next, using the Network Analyst tool, the “range anxiety” for each sta on was modeled at 30, and 70 miles to determine catchment areas for each exis ng sta on. Range Anxiety Distance between Home & Work, Home & Ac vity - The business point loca ons from the ESRI dataset were used to create density cluster spheres, indica ng the business districts in the region. Network Analyst was used to determine “service areas” for each of the business district density clusters. From each district 30 and 70 mile service district areas were used to approximate “range anxiety.” Distances (no current data – need Network Analyst to determine actual distance between possible loca ons, for example, between Chargers exis ng businesses)
32 E V
• EVChargerMaps (EV Charger News, 2009)32 • Municipal Facility loca ons (libraries, parks, city and county administra on buildings) (Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments, 2010)33
32 EV Charger News. (2009, October 21). EVChargerMaps. Retrieved July 8, 2010, from EV Charger News: h p://www.evchargermaps.com/?Address=Anaheim&Want=SPI%20LPI%20 AVC%20OC&Zoom=9 33 Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments. (2010, July ). Municipal Facility loca ons shapefi le. Marina, CA: AMBAG.
Table 8. Input Values and Scores. Ac vity Weighted Input Scoring yes, it is in the AMBAG region 1 it is in a business district and is scored based on the density of businesses 17 yes, it is in a business district 1 yes, it is a business parcel 1 yes, it is an accommoda on or food service business (NAICS 72) point 5 yes, it is a arts, entertainment, recrea on business (NAICS 71) point 5 yes, it is a business point (500 m cells) 1 yes, it is a gas sta on business point (NAICS 447) 1 yes, it is a grocery store business point (NAICS 4451) 5 yes, it is a hotel motel business point (NAICS 72111) 1 yes, it is a large employer (over 50 employees) business point 1 yes, it is a library facility point 5 yes, it is a retail or trade business point (NAICS 44, 45) 5
9 scored based on a jenks distribu on of popula ons within ci es yes, it is in a city 1 yes, it is on a street with parking 1 it is within a 2.5 mile distance from a highway, scored by closeness by 0.5 mi 5 (0.5 mi = 5, 1 mi = 4, etc) Score of 1-9 based on the Line Density func on around the Daily 2005 Road Volumes from the AMBAG RTDM road fi le. This score the popularity of the 9 areas near busy roads based on vehicle road volumes. yes, it is in an area with businesses 1 yes, it is in an area with hotel/motels 1 yes, it is in an area with visitor a rac ons 1 77
33 Poten al Sta on Areas
Figure 5. More examples of AMBAG Table 9. Other Weigh ng Evalua ons by Group input for the analysis.
Ac vity Group Weighted AMBAG 1.3% Business Districts 23.4% Business Parcel 1.3% Business point 37.7% Business point - old 0.0% Parcels with Large Employers (over 50) Popula on 13.0% Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Plan Linda Meckel April 2010 road 19.5% TAZ 3.9%
Legend ambag_region Grand Total 100.0% 1 large_emp
Miles ¯ 010205 in the suitability analysis as inputs into the model. Those parameters in Table 7 were not input into the model, but were examined and should be further evaluated to refi ne where future sta ons could be sited.
Table 8 indicates how the inputs were weighted in the suitability analysis, as diff erent weights infl uence more important aspects for where sta ons could be sited. For the purposes of this model, business districts, business points, loca on in a city, distance from a highway, and road volumes were weighted dispropor onately compared to the other inputs. Based on literature review, available data, and where parking already exists, these inputs were considered more important than other inputs.
Several other scenarios were tested and evaluated before deciding to weight more important inputs. These included, summing the values, asking a yes or no (0 or 1) for each input and grid cell, normalizing the values, normalizing the “yes” inputs, and weigh ng certain parameters.
Each type of scoring index was evaluated by the group of input parameters to see what criteria was infl uencing the output scores the greatest. This sub-grouping for the inputs was extremely valuable to parse down diff erent types of informa on. Table 9 above shows the group of input informa on that was contribu ng most to the output scores. The Ac vity Weighted Scoring takes advantage of the business point informa on. As noted in Table 6, Ac vity Loca ons, were determined by diff erent business types loca ons. This weigh ng pays par cular a en on to the types of businesses, and
34 E V
Figure 6. Poten al Charging Areas in the AMBAG Region. Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity
Date: June 2013 Project Name: Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Plan Created By: Jason Adelaars, Intern
Data Sources: EV Charger Maps; AMBAG
Legend
Vehicle Activity Index
High
Low
County Boundaries
Monterey Bay Area 010205Miles o secondarily to the clustering of those businesses as “business districts.” It was concluded that this approach was most appropriate for this study to evaluate the parameters given the nature of coupling charging with two to four or more hour ac vi es, would be to weight the inputs that contained those values. Figure 7. More examples of AMBAG input for the analysis.
The resul ng map in Figure 4, shows the scores of all the loca ons in the region based on the Ac vity Weighted Scoring system. The green areas are those that scored the least, while the dark brown to white areas are those that scored the highest. For more detailed maps of individual coun es, ci es, and other loca ons throughout the region, see Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas.
Limita ons of the Study While this analysis iden fi es convenient loca ons in popula on centers, it has some shortcomings. It does not iden fy poten al charging areas in more rural areas, it does not iden fy gaps between popula on and business centers, nor does it account for poten al charging areas that are not associated with clustered business and popula on centers. This sec on explores these shortcomings, and presents some supplementary analysis to mediate these issues.
35 Poten al Sta on Areas
Figure 8. UC Berkeley Global Venture Lab - User Model Personas, 2008.
It is important to note that this analysis is designed for Level I and Level II chargers, which require a number of hours to impart a signifi cant charge. As such, this analysis iden fi es loca ons where vehicles are expected to be parked for mul ple hours. This is not necessarily the best approach to iden fying poten al loca ons for the newer Level III fast chargers.
Newer Level III chargers can impart a full charge to an EV in less than an hour. This makes them more comparable to conven onal gas sta ons where EV drivers can pull in and charge for 15-30 minutes, then move on. As such, these sta ons may be be er suited for placement near highways, and their placement should not be limited to popula on centers. Addi onal analysis should be done to iden fy the best way to site these sta ons.
While this analysis iden fi es places where people park and conduct their business, it may not iden fy areas where large numbers of people gather on a more infrequent basis, such as on evenings and weekends. This includes fairgrounds, non-urban parks, golf courses, racetracks, and similar facili es. This also includes popular des na ons such as Big Sur State Park, the Big Basin Redwoods State Park, Pinnacles Na onal Park, and the area’s many
36 E V Figure 9. Parks and Recrea onal Areas In the Tri-County Area May Be Good Sites for Charging Infrastructure County, State, & National Parks within the AMBAG Region
1 OP Date: June 2013 ¨¦§101 Project Name: Electric Vehicle Big Basin Redwoods Infrastructure Plan Created By: Jason Adelaars, Intern State Park 17 OP Data Sources: California Protected Area Database; AMBAG Legend Wilder Ranch State Park Parks OP1 Hollister Hills ¨¦§5 State Vehicular Recreation Area Highways Fort Ord National Monument County Boundaries Torro Regional OP68 Park City Boundary OP25 Pinnacles National Monument
Garland Ranch Regional Park
Los Padres National Forest
¨¦§101 OP198
OP1
Lake San Antonio Recreation Area
Monterey Bay Area 0204010 Miles o
Figure 10. Poten al Sta on Loca ons for Filling Gaps in Exis ng Charging Infrastructure Potential Station Locations for Filling Gaps in Existing Charging Infrastructure
1 PO Date: June 2013 101 Project Name: Electric Vehicle Hwy 17 & ¨¦§ Infrastructure Plan Summit Rd Hwy 152 & Created By: Jason Adelaars, Intern 17 Heckler Pass PO Data Sources: EV Charger Maps; AMBAG Hwy 1 & Davenport Ave Legend Hwy 1 & Freedom Blvd Potential Charging Hwy 25 & 1 Stations PO Panoche Rd ¨¦§5 County Boundaries
City Boundary
PO68 Highways 5th Street Pinnacles Visitor 25 Carmel Valley (Gonzales) PO Center Village
4th Street (Soledad)
Big Sur Station Santa Lucia (Hwy 1) Shopping Center (Greenfield)
¨¦§101 PO198
PO1
Hwy 1 & Sand Dollar Beach
Bradley Rest Area (Hwy 101)
Monterey Bay Area 0204010 Miles o
37 Poten al Sta on Areas
county parks. Figure 9 provides a map of the parks and recrea onal areas in the tri-county region. These sites may be good loca ons for EV charging infrastructure as they a ract moderate crowds, especially on weekends and holidays. Figure 10 provides a map of poten al charging loca ons which would fi ll the gaps between exis ng charger loca ons, assuring that there is at least one charger available every 30 miles along major highways. These would also be good poten al loca ons for Level III fast chargers to accommodate the PEV driver who is travelling long distances in one trip.
Fleets Fleet vehicles are necessary in conduc ng the daily opera ons of many organiza ons. These vehicles allow employees to perform the travel requirement of their jobs without using their personal vehicles. Many fl eet vehicles are specialized for a specifi c task, such as law enforcement vehicles and postal trucks. There are numerous types of vehicle fl eets that operate on a daily basis within the AMBAG region. Iden fying the operators and loca ons of these fl eets would provide a valuable list for decision-makers interested in si ng EV charging sta ons and working with fl eet managers to add EVs. Based on research into fl eet vehicle loca ons within the AMBAG region, the following businesses, organiza ons, and ins tu ons are likely to have a large fl eet of vehicles.
• Universi es – Including University of California, Santa Cruz, California State University Monterey Bay, Monterey Peninsula College, Cabrillo College, Monterey Ins tute of Interna onal Study, the Naval Postgraduate School, and the Defense Language Ins tute.
• Local Jurisdic ons – Including police, fi re, code enforcement, parking enforcement, and employee transport.
• County/State Organiza ons – Including the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Monterey Bay Unifi ed Pollu on Control District, and California State Parks.
• Federal Organiza ons – Including the United States Postal Service, United States Geological Survey, and the Na onal Marine Fisheries Service.
• Transit – Including Monterey-Salinas Transit, Santa Cruz Metro, and San Benito County Express.
• U li es – Including Cal-Am Water, Pacifi c Gas & Electric, Santa Cruz Municipal U li es, California Water Service Co., Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, Marina Coast Water District, and the San Benito County Water District.
• Private Transport Companies – Including Yellow Cab, Early Bird Airport Shu le Service, Monterey Airbus, Santa Cruz Airport Shu le, and Coastal Yellow Cab.
38 E V
• Rental Car Companies – Including Enterprise, Hertz, Avis, Budget, and Auto World Santa Cruz.
• Other Private Companies – Including Fresh Express, Dole Fresh Vegetables, and the Monterey County Herald.
PEVs have the ability to meet the needs of many vehicle fl eet services within the AMBAG region. As PEV charging infrastructure con nues to expand, these vehicle fl eets can be augmented by PEVs. Targe ng vehicles fl eets for PEV replacements and upgrades would increase regional adop on of EVs and increase demand for charging infrastructure.
A number of PEVs are already in use in fl eets in the tri-county area. According to the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC) Fleet Services website supports a fl eet of over 700 vehicles, which include rental compact sedans, and short trip cart vehicles. The University is currently researching the capacity to power the fl eet using alterna ve energy sources. Similarly, the City of Monterey Fleet Services operates over 220 vehicles, including small short trip vehicles, and hybrid and electric vehicles. Finally, Yellow Cab is a locally owned cab service in the Monterey, Salinas, and Hollister areas, maintaining a fl eet of EV sedans.
Other Methods to Site EV Sta ons Several studies have been conducted to see who is most likely to purchase electric vehicles fi rst, and to use these parameters as a way to phase the EV charging infrastructure rollout. These approaches, while innova ve for their own uses, were more focused on early adopters than on general best loca ons. The following is a summary of these other approaches.
The UC Berkeley Global Venture lab iden fi ed fi ve diff erent “personas” as user models for early adopters of EVs. These included High tech professionals, other professionals, taxi drivers, college students, and homemakers in a high- income households (Cheng, et al., 2008)34. These personas, as seen in Figure 8, were evaluated based on census data, green awareness, concern with cost-eff ec veness, average mileage, disposable income, willingness to try new technologies, and approximate number of individuals in each category. Each persona was assigned loca on charging requirements. Next, the Global Venture lab extrapolated these loca ons to a 4:1 charging sta on to electric vehicle ra o for the fi rst year, and a 2.5: 1 sta on to vehicle ra o by year 5. Their analysis also included ba ery swapping sta ons at a constant 10:1 sta on to vehicle ra o over the en re fi ve-year rollout.
34 Cheng, I. (., Desai, D., Koudigkelis, K., de Vasconcellos, P., Kaminsky, P., Sidhu, I., et al. (2008, November 21). Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Rollout Strategy. Global Venture Lab Technical Brief . Berkeley, CA: U.C. Berkeley. 39 Poten al Sta on Areas
Figure 11. Top 20 Employers in the Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Benito Coun es Area Potential Charging Areas Based on Large Employers
OP17
Date: June 2013 §101 ¨¦ Project Name: Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Plan Created By: Jason Adelaars, Intern 1 OP Plantronics Inc. Data Sources: Santa Cruz Medical Center EV Charger Maps; UC Santa Cruz AMBAG; InfoUSA Santa Cruz Government Center
Santa Cruz Boardwalk Legend Watsonville Community Hospital Vehicle Activity Index High
Natural Selection Foods Low
156 Highways OP1 OP
Large Employers OP156 25 OP City Boundary
County Boundaries Monterey County Natividad Medical Center Social Services Salinas Valley Memorial Health Center Department of Defense Taylor Farms CA Inc. Mann Packing Company Spanish Bay Inn Fresh Express
Naval Postgraduate School D’Arrigo Brothers¨¦§101
McGraw-Hill OP68
Pebble Beach Country Club Community Hospital of Monterey Peninsula OP1 Monterey Bay 08164Mileso The analysis expects that 50% of charging will occur at home, secondary charging will occur at work, BART and Caltrain sta ons, and at selected malls, stadiums, and hospitals. Finally, swapping sta ons should be located along main highways in selected coun es. By year fi ve they expected addi onal employers, more homes, 50% of all available sta on parking spots, on-street charging, and private and public parking structures to have charging sta ons.
The Center for Entrepreneurship & Technology iden fi ed four types of transporta on sectors likely to adopt EVs as a follow-up to the UC Global Venture roll-out study. These included private vehicle commutes to companies, regional freight delivery opera ons, last-mile companies, and governmental fl eets (Chavis, et al., 2009)35. Their analysis focused on large employer loca ons, logis c company loca ons, car-sharing companies, and governmental fl eets. Figure 11 provides a list of the largest twenty employers in the tri-county region as poten al sites for employer-based charging. These loca ons would be par cularly well suited for Level I and II chargers since most workers are expected to be at their place of work for a number of hours.
35 Chavis, C., Kanairo, K., Samar no, A. L., Sathaye, N., Sidhu, I., Kaminsky, P., et al. (2009, September 18). Strategies for Electric Vehicle Deployment in the San Francisco Bay Area. Center for Entrepreneurship & Technology Technical Brief . Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley. 40 E V
Addi onally, a University of Michigan study looked at the purchase probabili es of PHEVs, the correla ng demographics and purchase probability based on charging behavior (Cur n, Shrago, & Mikkelsen, 2009). This study informed many of the early adopter a ributes used in this suitability analysis. However, because the University of Michigan study was focused on PHEVs that have a much larger range than pure EVs, it is expected that some characteris cs of these early adopters may not be consistent with EV early adopters.
Another study from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) in 2010 looked at origins and des na ons of likely EV owners, major regional des na ons and other si ng factors as a strategy to deploy charging sta ons36. These trips were divided into work and non-work trips and relied heavily on informa on from the PSRC regional travel demand model. Of par cular interest were the supplemental factors, which included, regionally desired growth centers, manufacturing-industrial centers, other sub-regional centers, major transporta on facili es, park and ride parking lots, parking lots in general, household density, employment density and median household income. AMBAG evaluated as many of these parameters as possible based on the data available in the Monterey Bay Area region.
As more EVs enter the market and charging pa erns of early adopters are studied, more models for strategic infrastructure deployment will be developed. It is important for users of these models to understand the intricacies of what parameters are being evaluated. Future parameters that should also be considered, if available from the u lity companies, are the loca ons and load allowances of energy infrastructure. The adop on of this new technology relies on understanding the implica ons of EV use on our electric infrastructure. Other Methods to Site EV Sta ons
Best Prac ces in Electric Vehicle Charging Sta on Si ng Plug-In America reccommends that organiza ons observe twelve best prac ces when si ng EV charging sta ons:37
• Site loca on – Evaluate the site giving considera on to its perceived rela ve importance and usage compared to other nearby sites.
• User base – Evaluate the charging needs for poten al users of the site. This evalua on should include how far users drive to get to the site and how long they are most likely to leave their vehicles parked there.
• Charging level(s) – Plan for and match charging levels (1, 2 or 3) to the user base for the site. (For example, Level 1 for parking mes typically greater than 3 hours, Level 2 for shorter mes.) 36 Miller, Ivan, and Carol Naito. Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Regional Sta on Si ng Analysis. Presenta on. Puget Sound Regional Council, July 2010. 37 Plug-in 12 41 Poten al Sta on Areas
• Parking and Charging spaces – Locate, whenever feasible, EV charging and parking spaces away from prime loca ons in lots and in front of businesses.
• Parking and Charging spaces – Locate, whenever feasible, EV charging and parking spaces away from ADA parking.
• Parking and Charging spaces – Locate EV charging and parking spaces in reasonable proximity to the main electrical supply or service panel(s) for the facility.
• Electrical Wiring – In the case of Level 1 charging sta ons, consider installing conduit and supply capacity that allows for future upgrading to Level 2 charging at minimal addi onal circuitry expense.
• Signage – Install recommended wayfi nder and charging sta on signage. This signage is both for loca onal and enforcement purposes.
• Signage – Install usage signage appropriate to the type and level of charging provided, including contact informa on to report vandalism and out-of- order condi ons.
• Maintenance – Document and commit to an ongoing plan for oversight, repair, and maintenance of installed charging sta ons. This plan should include training of relevant site personnel with the goal of maximizing opera onal readiness for all installed charging sta ons at the facility.
42 E V
43 INFRASTRUCTURE ROLLOUT
E V
E V
E V
44 E V
Infrastructure Rollout Electrifying 75 percent of the VMT in 2035 will require approximately 4.4 million kWh of energy per day being dispensed through chargers, homes, businesses, and public areas. While it is expected that this number will decrease as car manufacturers increase the effi ciency of the ba eries, thus increasing vehicle range, s ll a substan al number of chargers will need to be installed.
How will we comply with the Governers Execu ve Order to put 1.5 million ZEVs on California’s roads by 2025? What will it take to reach a goal of 75 percent electrifi ed VMT by 2035? How will the Monterey Bay Area align with the rest of California and the U.S.? The following provides a rough outline of the 2011 AMBAG Pilot Project, other grant ac vi es and needs in the region to achieve this goal, and the combined regional infrastructure needs through 2035.
Case Study: AMBAG’s 2011 EV Charging Sta on Project In 2011, grant funding from the MBUAPCD allowed AMBAG to place four public EV charging sta ons in the ci es of Salinas, Watsonville, San Juan Bau sta, and Carmel. The four ci es were selected based on their scores from the vehicle ac vity intensity analysis. A er a compe ve request for proposals, the company ECOtality North America responded with an off er to provide a total of four sta ons, including installa on and warranty, for $25,000.
In return for the sta on, AMBAG asked each city to provide AMBAG and MBUAPCD access to all the data collected from each charger for the life me of the charger, waive all permi ng fees associated with the installa on of the public EV charging sta on, and pay the remaining four years of associated networking fees37. The legal process of transferring each sta on to each city was more lengthy than expected. One city even declined the sta on due to the transfer contract. A lesson learned from this experience is that each city has specifi c concerns, such as ongoing networking fees, and it may be more effi cient to engage the city a orney to help write the contract rather than having them respond to boiler plate language. This will assure that the partner agency concerns are addressed, and result in a more collaborra ve contract process. Figure 12. Sta on Installa on. In some cases, presenta ons were made to city councils and planning Gabriel of Regalado Electric installing commissions to accept the sta on and approve the loca on of the sta on. the Blink Sta on at the Sunset Center Several elected offi cials and commissioners voiced concerns about changing the in Carmel. image of the city, the payment system, the design aesthe cs and losing parking
37 The networking fee is $20 per month, and provides back offi ce payment, customer, and technical support. 45 Infrastructure Rollout
spaces in front of key businesses. These concerns need to be addressed early in the project planning process to assure that the concerns of the community are addressed, and charging sta ons are installed expediently. AMBAG found that while addi on of a new technology can be troubling to elected offi cials, generally, councils and commissions were excited to be part of the projects for a nominal cost to their city.
Figure 13. City of Salinas project The process of iden fying suitable sta on loca ons within each city was guided Loca on and Site Plan by the vehicle ac vity intensity analysis, the loca on of a suffi cient power supply (240V/30amps), visibility to PROJECT TITLE ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUPPLY EQUIPMENT (EVSE)
SCOPE OF WORK pedestrians for poten al marke ng, THE INSTALLATION OF A PEDESTAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION IN THE SIDEWALK TO SERVE ON-STREET DIAGONAL PARKING. the loca on of city property or city
WEST GABILAN STREET PROJECT DATA OWNER/PROJECT LOCATION rights-of-way, and whether the city CITY OF SALINAS 200 LINCOLN AVENUE SALINAS, CA 93901 was willing to allow parking at the
LOCATION MAP LEGAL INFORMATION A.P.N. 002246014000 loca on for 2-4 hours. INDEX OF SHEETS A-1 SITE PLAN PROJECT LOCATION A-2 SITE DETAIL E-1 SINGLE LINE Several loca ons were evaluated in
LINCOLN AVENUE
DATE: 7-11-2011
SITE PLAN A-1
Figure 14. City of Salinas Ini al Site Plan.*plan was eventually modifi ed by the city to include an ADA access ramp between two parking spaces. PROJECT TITLE ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUPPLY EQUIPMENT (EVSE)
LINCOLN AVENUE APPLICABLE CODES 2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC) 2010 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC)
16’
ADA ACCESS
31’
EXISTING PLANTER WITH TREE NEWSPAPER VENDING 4’-8” WIDTH X 11’-9” LENGTH MACHINES (E) 8’-4” SIDEWALK
4’ SIDEWALK EXISTING SIGN POST DATE: 7-11-2011 INSTALLATION NOTES: UNIT ORIENTATED 245° SW. EVSE 27-1/2” SITE DETAIL FROM FACE OF CURB, IN LINE WITH EXISTING ADA SIGN POST. EVSE TO SERVE EITHER ADA SPACE TO LEFT OR STANDARD PARKING TO RIGHT. A-2
46 E V
each of the selected ci es. A er visi ng the sites38, a site plan was developed (see Figures 8, 9 and 10) and submi ed to each city’s permi ng department. Each site plan included a project loca on, detailed site plan, and electrical plan. Each permi ng department handled these plans diff erently, sugges ng that common guidelines for on-street public charging sta ons need to be developed. While each site plan took into account ADA accessibility, there is no clear state or federal standard for public EV charging sta ons and ADA accessibility. Further, in some cases, exis ng ADA spaces in some ci es required retrofi ng to meet general ADA requirements. Going forward, jurisdic ons should develop guidelines for how ADA accessibility and public EV charging sta on accessibility be combined.
The actual installa on for each sta on was rela vely simple, as each loca on had been selected par ally because of its proximity to the necessary power supply and therefore required minimal trenching and concrete patching. The more expensive installa ons were those where there was more extensive trenching and concrete repair, and where longer electrical conduit had to be run to meet the panel. Fortunately, no transformers required addi onal capacity, as that would have increased the installa on price greatly. Figure 16. Online BlinkMap. Drivers will know where the sta on The installed sta ons underwent safety tes ng and are connected to the is through maps such as the Blink Locator map. “network” via a CDMA (a type of channel access method) connec on. This www.blinknetwork.com/locator.html allows users to know, before arriving at the sta on, if the sta on is in use (see Figure 11), and to process payments off -site.
38 Thanks go to Andy Hartman of Local IBEW 234 for visi ng all the proposed site loca ons and crea ng the charging sta on site plans.
Figure 15. City of Salinas Electrical Installa on Plan.
INTERIOR EXTERIOR EVSE—BLINK PE-30 (N) PROJECT TITLE ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUPPLY EQUIPMENT (EVSE) TYPICAL SIGNAGE
STANDARD ADA PARKING ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR REGALADO ELECTRIC PARKING SPACE SPACE 6337 IMPERIAL COURT APTOS, CA 95003 (831) 824-4714 C-10 # 946555 PANEL “B” (E)
120/208 VAC 225A NOTE 3 Ø 4 WIRE INSTALLATION ACCORDING TO NEC AND MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS AC WIRING LABEL AWG
BLACK L1—A Ø #8 RED L2—B Ø #8 GREEN GROUND #10
INPUT POWER REQUIREMENTS VOLTAGE 208—240 VAC, 60 HZ SERVICE 40 AMP
2P 40A PANEL “B” LOAD CALCULATION A Ø 3.9 A B Ø 5.9 A C Ø 19.3 A 2-#8 + 1-#10 AWG IN 3/4” INSTALLATION NOTES: CONDUIT (E) UNIT ORIENTATED 245° SW PANEL “B” LOAD DESCRIPTION 27-1/2” TO CENTER OFF LIGHTING DATE: 7-11-2011 FACE OF CURB RECEPTACLES SINGLE LINE Figure 17. The Sunset Center Sta on. E-1 The installed sta on at the Carmel Sunset Center can be accessed by both an ADA accessible and regular parking spot. 47 Infrastructure Rollout
Figure 18. Loca ons of Exis ng and Planned Sta ons in the Monterey Bay Area, June 2013. Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity
OP17
101 Date: June 2013 ¨¦§ Project Name: Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Plan Created By: Jason Adelaars, Intern Data Sources: EV Charger Maps; AMBAG
Legend Vehicle Activity Index High
Low
OP1 OP156 Highways Existing/Proposed OP156 PEV Stations Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 1 & Level 2
¨¦§101 Proposed
County Boundaries
¨¦§101 City Boundary OP68
OP1
Monterey Bay o 08164Mileso Salinas Valley0241Miles Future EV Infrastructure Ac vi es
Public Charging Sta on Loca ons Using the vehicle ac vity intensity analysis, loca ons containing approximately 1,774 acres were iden fi ed as priority loca ons to site public charging sta ons. This area covers over 5,800 parcels that include a total of 5,273 businesses. Loca ons in the public right-of-way include on-street or curbside parking spaces and public garage and lot parking spaces. The private sector will govern commercial, industrial, and residen al loca ons including private lots and garages. Installa on of private charging sta ons on a massive scale will require local jurisdic ons to have a well thought out and streamlined permi ng process.
2012 Grant Ac vi es By 2012 the CEC and CARB placed hundreds of EVs and thousands of PHEVs throughout California, and many “early adopters” purchased EVs such as the Nissan Leaf or PHEVs like the Chevy Volt and Toyota Plug-In Prius.39 Within the
39 California Air Resources Board. (2008). Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Sacramento: State of California. 48 E V
Table 10. Number of Level 3 Chargers Needed in the Monterey Bay Area in 2035. Table assumes an average ba ery size of 24kWh, an average range of 100mi, and 0.24kWh/mi. on on Number of Level 3 Number of Level Chargers 15 - 84 aged 15 - 84 aged Popula 75% Electric Daily VMT in 2035 Needed Daily Energy (kWh) per # of Full Charges Day # of Charges home occurring at (50%) Number of Public/ (Level Chargers Work per 2 @ 4hours charge) in Use 85% Always Assump AMBAG in 2035 with SB 375 722,735 18,296,166 4,391,080 182,962 91,481 15,247 17,937 1,906 AMBAG in 2010 599,100 13,173,916 3,161,740 131,739 65,870 10,978 12,916 1,372
This table es mates, based on AMBAG popula on and RTDM VMT forecasts, the amount of energy, full charges (see assump ons above), and subsequent number of charging sta ons needed for the Monterey Bay Area by 2035. The number of full charges from this table was then used to es mate the approximate cost of infrastructure needed to meet an 75% electric VMT future in Table 11.
Monterey Bay Area more public charging equipment will be installed by TAMC, ChargePoint (as part of the San Francisco Bay Area), the City of Santa Cruz, private employers, and through CEC grants obtained by the Monterey Bay Electrical Vehicle Alliance (MBEVA). Figure 13 maps exis ng and proposed sta ons as of June 2013.
To encourage more sta ons coming into the region, MBEVA obtained $200,000 in grant money from the CEC for a “Community Readiness Plan,” which should aid local jurisdic ons to develop streamlined permi ng processes and plan for electrifi ca on of key areas in the region.
It is expected that the Monterey Bay Area will be subject to more grant a en on as a connector region between the major EV deployment areas of San Francisco and Los Angeles (see Table 12 for more on the na onal EV deployment projects). This would mean poten ally collabora ng with other central coast coun es and ci es to create an EV charging network along Highway 101 and Highway 1 between the San Francisco and Los Angeles areas.
Key Future Milestones and Timeline for Deployment From now un l 2050 there are a number of milestones that relate to EV infrastructure development or greenhouse gas emissions produced by the
49 Infrastructure Rollout
Table 11. Number of Chargers and Cost of Infrastructure to Elec fy 75% of VMT by 2035. Assumes there are a total of 182,962 full charges per day required in the AMBAG Region in 2035. % Charges @ Level 2 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % Charges @ Level 3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
# of Level 2 Chargers 30,494 27,444 24,395 21,346 18,296 15,247 12,197 9,148 6,099 3,049 - # of Level 3 Chargers - 381 762 1,144 1,525 1,906 2,287 2,668 3,049 3,431 3,812
Total chargers 30,494 27,825 25,157 22,489 19,821 17,153 14,484 11,816 9,148 6,480 3,812 Es mated Costs (millions) Level 2 @ $5,500 $168M $151M $134M $117M $101M $84M $67M $50M $34M $17M - Level 3 @ $40,000 - $15M $30M $46M $61M $76M $91M $107M $122M $137M $152M
TOTAL COST $168M $166M $165M $163M $162M $160M $159M $157M $156M $154M $152M
Figure 19. Graph of the Number of Chargers and Cost of Infrastructure.
35,000 170M
30,000 165M
25,000 160M
20,000
155M
15,000 in Millions of Dollars 150M Number of Charging Stations 10,000
145M 5,000
- 140M 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Number of Level 2 Chargers Number of Level 3 Chargers TOTAL COST
50 E V
Monterey Bay Area. They are as follows:
2015 • CEC & CARB Targets: Increases in amount of EVs and PHEVs • Note: Phase II of EV Roadmap – expand electrifi ca on ecosystem program by 20 to 25 ci es. 2020 • Regional Target I: for Regional GHG emissions – no per capita change in GHG emissions from 2005 levels. This is only based on VMT, not on general GHG emissions. • State target I: at 1990 GHG emission levels • California Execu ve Order B-16-2012 ◦ State’s ZEV infrastructure will be able to support up to 1 million vehicles ◦ The costs of ZEVs will be compe ve with conven onal combus on vehicles and they will be accessible to mainstream consumers, facilita ng widespread adop on ◦ There will be widespread use of ZEVs for public transporta on and freight transport 2025 • California Execu ve Order B-16-2012: Over 1.5 million ZEVs wil be on California roadways and their market share will be expanding 2035 • Regional Target II: for Regional GHG emissions –(-5% per capita reduc on in GHG). • Coordina on with the 2035 Long Range Plan Metropolitan Transporta on Plan. 2050 • Target II for State – 20% below 1990 GHG emission levels. • Achievement of 75% electric VMT. For the purposes of this plan, the 2035 Long Range Metropolitan Transporta on Plan has been used to es mate the number of chargers needed and the possible cost of that infrastructure (see Tables 10 and 11). It should be noted that the assump ons in these tables that will change as the industry con nues to grow in the next fi ve to ten years.
What should be noted about these tables is the diff eren al in both the cost of Level 2 vs. Level 3 chargers, and how many sta ons in general are needed to meet the overall charging needs of the region. These projec ons includes the total number of charging sta ons, whether home, private, or publicly available charging sta ons. Ul mately, there will be a mix of all types of charging loca ons throughout this region. The ability of public agencies and private en es to pay for the infrastructure will infl uence this distribu on greatly. It is unknown what the exact amount of electric VMT the region can achieve given both the availability and ability to purchase EVs in the future. 51 Infrastructure Rollout
Other Major EV Ac vi es in the US Around the U.S., Electrifi ca on Ecosystem Communi es, places where EV infrastructure and EV deployment will be targeted, will receive an infl ux of charging sta ons, vehicles, and technical support. Three diff erent projects exist – Project Get Ready, The EV Project, and ChargePoint America. Table 12 illustrates the diff erent ci es and the extent to which each project will strategically deploy infrastructure or collaborate with partners.
Table 12. Na onally funded EV Infrastructure Deployment Programs. Project Get Ready The EV Project ChargePoint America h p://www.projectgetready.org h p://www.theevproject.com h p://chargepointamerica.com Sponsored by Coulomb Technologies 9 selected regions in the US. Create a dynamic “menu” of 14,650 Level 2 (220 V) Chargers strategic plug-in readiness ac ons 5,000 fully networked Level II (220v) including the “business case” for 310 DC Fast-Chargers ChargePoint Networked®, home and each ac on. 40+ Project Partners public/commercial. Provide a web database of American Objec ve is to place charging and interna onal plug-in readiness 5,700 Nissan LEAF Cars sta ons strategically across the ac vi es. 2,600 Chevrolet Volt Cars metropolitan areas in a variety of At least 20 ci es se ngs including public places, 1,200 New Jobs by 2012 Discuss their lessons learned and private garages, airports, train best prac ces, and report these 5,500 New Jobs by 2017 sta ons, malls, movie theatres, rental car agencies, restaurants, and conversa ons on their website and materials. 16 Major Ci es other likely loca ons where owners of electric vehicles park their cars and need to charge. Arizona Phoenix, Tucson California Los Angeles (Ac ve City in the Plug-in Space), San Francisco Bay Area (Ac ve Los Angeles, San Diego Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Jose - City in the Plug-in Space) San Francisco Bay Area Colorado Greater Denver Washington, D.C. Washington D.C. Washington D.C. Florida Tampa Bay, Central Florida Orlando Hawaii Hawaii (Ac ve City in the Plug-in Space) Illinois Chicago, IL (Ac ve City in the Plug-in Space) Indiana Indianapolis Region Kansas, Missouri Kansas City Michigan Detroit New York
52 E V
Table 12. (cont.) Project Get Ready The EV Project ChargePoint America h p://www.projectgetready.org h p://www.theevproject.com h p://chargepointamerica.com New York City, NY (Ac ve City in the Plug-in Space) New York City North Carolina Raleigh & Research Triangle Oregon Portland Portland, Corvallis, Eugene, Salem Rhode Island Rhode Island Tennessee Cha anooga, Knoxville, Nashville Texas Houston Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth Aus n Washington Sea le Bellevue-Redmond Virginia Richmond Canada Vancouver, Toronto Europe Amsterdam (Ac ve City in the Plug-in Space)
Sta ons; Cars; Other
Rocky Mountain Ins tute, The Wa Sta on; Blink Coulomb Technologies Lemelson Founda on, See New Media, Ohio State University, AAA, Ford, Chevrolet and smart USA HelloElectric.org, Dominion, Power Chevrolet Volt, Ford Transit Connect, Nissan; Chevrolet; Ford Tagging, Mitsubishi Motors, ECOtality, Ford Focus BEV and smart fortwo GE, Park Pod, Nescaum, ESource, UL, electric drive Carnegie Mellon, EMPower, Bright Automo ve, Coulomb Technologies, Portland State, BPA, CalCars, UC Sponsored by the American Recovery Berkeley, SDGE, ESMT, P&G, UC Davis, US DOE, Idaho Na onal Laboratory and Reinvestment Act through Progress Energy, EV-Charge America, the Transporta on Electrifi ca on Nissan, NREL, Walmart, Sams Club, (INL) Ini a ve administered by the Plug-In America, Portland General Department of Energy Electric, RIT.
53 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
E V
E V
E V
54 E V
Opera ons & Maintenance A er EV infrastructure is installed it must be operated and maintained. Who owns the infrastructure determines who will operate and maintain the infrastructure. It is expected that EVSE equipment will be owned by individuals at private residences, by private companies at employment centers, and by municipali es in public loca ons.
Opera on Business Models
Where sta ons are available for public charging, there are several business models that can be deployed to collect payment while s ll having the safety features necessary for publicly accessible infrastructure. These models include EV Promo on/Least Involvement, Pay-Parking Infrastructure Reliant, and Third Party Opera on.
Bill Boyce, in a 2009 Sacramento Municipal U lity District (SMUD) presenta on40 included addi onal models: U lity Bundled Service, Turnkey Infrastructure Service Providers, and Centralized/”Gas Sta on” Opera ons. U lity Bundled Services make use of exis ng contractor networks and are bundled with other electrical service to spread cost, while Turnkey Infrastructure Service Providers provide hardware, installa on, opera ons and maintenance, and billing. Finally, the Centralized / “Gas Sta on” Opera ons model describes fast charging scenarios. For this study, the Turnkey Infrastructure Service Provider and Third Party Opera on models are similar. It is expected that as EV charging system technology becomes more sophis cated there will be other business models that evolve.
EV Promo on/Least Involvement In this model, the charging sta ons are purchased and installed, and there is no capability to charge customers who use the sta on. These sta ons s ll employ safety features, and can monitor energy use. If the owner wanted to collect payment, another system, such as a parking pay sta on, would have to be put in place. This model is analogous to most of the fi rst genera on charging sta ons in place prior to 2010. Overall, the major diff erence between this and other models, is that these sta ons are not networked and the only opera on cost is electricity.
40 Bill Boyce, S. M. (2009). Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Market History and Observa ons. September 23, 2009 EV Charging Public Mee ng. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board. 55 Opera ons & Maintenance
Table 13. Business Model 1: EV Promo on
EV Promo on/Least Involvement Pro Con • Minimal opera onal involvement. • No possible revenue streams. Sta on owner only pays for • Each sta on will have to be electricity. monitored individually. • Less networking advantages, like knowing if in-use at a specifi c me. • Maintenance and monitoring will be up to the sta on owner.
Pay-Parking Infrastructure Reliant (pre-pay) These parking sta ons rely on exis ng or new pay-parking infrastructure, such as a centralized pay sta on. Each customer recieves a code that will operate the sta on, and customers can pre-pay. The key diff erence to this model is that it is integrated into a pay-parking system. This model works best in a centralized loca on where customers are paying to park at a given loca on.
Table 14. Business Model 2: Pay-Parking Infrastructure Reliant
Pay-Parking Infrastructure Reliant (pre-pay) Pro Con • Integrates with exis ng pay • Each sta on will have to be parking kiosk infrastructure. monitored individually. • Ties into an overall parking • Addi onal, suppor ng management plan/system. infrastructure is required. • User friendly, especially because • Less networking advantages, like most “parkers” are familiar with knowing if in-use at a specifi c pay-to-park systems. me. • Maintenance and monitoring could be up to the organiza on, but is part of the overall parking program.
Third Party Opera on This is a system of public networked EV charging sta ons. Each sta on is part of a networked system that is integrated with a separate third-party opera on system. There is a dynamic exchange of informa on available between each charger and the overall system, including reserving sta ons, collec ng data, and knowing where sta ons are in use. In this model, many sta ons are deployed over a large area, and all are operated through the same third-party portal.
56 E V
Figure 20. Analysis of diff erent available business models for EV payment systems.
Table 15. Business Model 3: Third Party Opera on
Third Party Opera on Pro Con • Most sophis cated system. • Con nuing opera ons fees and • Very user friendly. contract renewals to be part of the network. • Users can do a subscrip on. • Exis ng companies do not share • Li le opera on required by the network informa on, requiring site owner besides paying the consumers to use mul ple network and maintenance fees. networks to locate sta ons. • Sta ons take credit cards.
Se ng the Price to Re-Charge a Vehicle Figure 20 was created to help guide organiza ons as they determine what price they should charge customers to use a public charging sta on. Since it is expected that usage of the sta ons will be minimal un l more vehicles enter the area, it is important for organiza ons to know at what price they will break even or make a profi t. The price varies from a once a month plug-in session
57 Opera ons & Maintenance
Table 16. What Should Sta on Owners Charge to Break Even? at $23.46 to the sta on being used six mes a day at $3.57. Figure 21 graphically displays this informa on on as well. It should be noted that these mated mated Even Even
Annual tables take into account the Blink Number (per kwh) Es of Charges of Charges per month per month per sta per charge) Annual Max Annual Max Annual Cost Energy Used Energy Minimum Fee Minimum Fee Electricity Cost Electricity Cost (assuming 4hrs (assuming 4hrs specifi c networking fee of $20/month, Charged to Break Break to Charged Cost of Electricity Cost and the Blink electric draw of 7.2kWh. 1 $0.12 346 $41.47 $23.46 $281.47 5 $0.12 1,728 $207.36 $7.46 $447.36 10 $0.12 3,456 $414.72 $5.46 $654.72 Charging System 15 $0.12 5,184 $622.08 $4.79 $862.08 Maintenance 20 $0.12 6,912 $829.44 $4.46 $1,069.44 The cost to maintain the charging 25 $0.12 8,640 $1,036.80 $4.26 $1,276.80 sta ons should be minimal, and are 30 $0.12 10,368 $1,244.16 $4.12 $1,484.16 similar to maintaining other electrical 35 $0.12 12,096 $1,451.52 $4.03 $1,691.52 systems in a household. These sta ons 40 $0.12 13,824 $1,658.88 $3.96 $1,898.88 will be required to be repaired on 45 $0.12 15,552 $1,866.24 $3.90 $2,106.24 site by a qualifi ed electrician or 50 $0.12 17,280 $2,073.60 $3.86 $2,313.60 EVSE cer fi ed contractor. Cer fi ed 55 $0.12 19,008 $2,280.96 $3.82 $2,520.96 contractor programs are being 60 $0.12 20,736 $2,488.32 $3.79 $2,728.32 developed by diff erent charging 65 $0.12 22,464 $2,695.68 $3.76 $2,935.68 sta on manufacturers who are in turn 70 $0.12 24,192 $2,903.04 $3.74 $3,143.04 training local electricians, through 75 $0.12 25,920 $3,110.40 $3.72 $3,350.40 groups like IBEW. 80 $0.12 27,648 $3,317.76 $3.71 $3,557.76 85 $0.12 29,376 $3,525.12 $3.69 $3,765.12 Several organiza ons in the Monterey 90 $0.12 31,104 $3,732.48 $3.68 $3,972.48 Bay Area voiced concern that public 95 $0.12 32,832 $3,939.84 $3.67 $4,179.84 EV charging sta ons could be subject 100 $0.12 34,560 $4,147.20 $3.66 $4,387.20 to vandalism, mainly by cu ng the 110 $0.12 38,016 $4,561.92 $3.64 $4,801.92 cord that connects the sta on to 120 $0.12 41,472 $4,976.64 $3.62 $5,216.64 the vehicle, or by users trying to 130 $0.12 44,928 $5,391.36 $3.61 $5,631.36 disassemble the sta ons for copper 140 $0.12 48,384 $5,806.08 $3.60 $6,046.08 conduit. This would be an addi onal 150 $0.12 51,840 $6,220.80 $3.59 $6,460.80 repair cost, but like any other piece 160 $0.12 55,296 $6,635.52 $3.58 $6,875.52 of infrastructure in the public realm, 170 $0.12 58,752 $7,050.24 $3.57 $7,290.24 there is always a risk of vandalism. 180* $0.12 62,208 $7,464.96 $3.57 $7,704.96 * 180 max would be 6 per day assuming 24 hours of non-stop charging. Vehicle Maintenance It is expected that EVs will be less Assump ons: expensive to maintain than internal Annual Blink Networking Fees: $240.00 combus on engine vehicles. Blink Electrical Draw (kWh): 7.2 Maintenance is expected to mainly be performed by automakers, as is the current trend. However, like the 58 E V cer fi ed contractors who are learning to maintain the charging sta ons, automakers are developing programs to train mechanics to maintain EVs as well.
Figure 21. What Should Organiza ons Charge to Break Even?
Minimum Fee Charged to break even $25.00
$22.50
$20.00
$17.50
$15.00
$12.50
$10.00
$7.50
$5.00
$2.50
$- 1 7 13 19 25 31 37 43 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 97 103 109 115 121 127 133 139 145 151 157 163 169 175 Number of Expected EV Charging Sessions per Month
Minimum Fee Charged to break even
59 NEEDS & EXISTING RESOURCES FOR EV SUCCESS
E V
E V
E V
60 E V
Needs and Exis ng Resources for EV Success In order for the wide adop on of EVs to occur in the Monterey Bay Area, there will need to be policies, incen ves, training and possibly investment in companies producing EV related technologies. The following outlines the various resources, incen ves, and needs.
Federal & State Incen ves Federal and state credits have been put in place to reduce the cost of purchasing EVs and charging equipment. A huge barrier to poten al EV owners and the placement of charging sta ons is the cost. In 2011, a California resident purchasing a new EV was eligible for up to $7,500 in federal tax credits and up to $2,500 in state assistance. These combined made it more feasible for buyers of the Nissan Leaf ($34,000) and the Chevrolet Volt ($41,000) to consider an EV or PHEV as their next car to purchase. For the most up to date list of State and Federal incen ves, visit: h p://www.pluginamerica.org/incen ves h p://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/fed_summary h p://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/state?p=state_ summary&state=CA&search_bu on=Go
Municipal Policies and Codes The adop on and widespread use of EVs will ini ally be con ngent upon local policies that encourage and easily permit the placement of EVSE equipment, and incen ves for drivers (such as driving in the carpool lane, or priority parking). As stated in the Pilot Project sec on, there is a need for streamlined permi ng processes. MBEVA has been working with the local building offi cials to streamline the residen al permi ng process. Next, they will focus on the commercial property permi ng process, and then the public right-of- way permi ng process. The goal of streamlining these processes is to have standards in place to minimize the chance of having to re-do a site plan or other por ons of the applica on.
As more charging sta ons are installed collabora on with PG&E will be cri cal. New charging sta ons put an increased demand on the grid and therefore on local transformers. Coordina ng with PG&E is the only way to ensure that the demand and grid infrastructure improvements can be managed is such as way that the chance of overloading the grid is minimized or eliminated.
Streamlined EV permi ng and promo onal policies in other ci es are listed in Table 17. These policies may be used as guide for other ci es in implemen ng policies to encourage EV adop on.
61 Needs and Resources for EV Success
Table 17. Examples of Munipal Policies to Promote Electric Vehicles
City Policy San Francisco, CA Preparing an Electric Vehicle-ready checklist for their website to help residents easily navigate the permi ng process. Raleigh, NC Developed a clear step-by-step process and created an educa onal video, available online, to help residents understand the requirements for installing an electric vehicle charging sta on. Developing educa onal programs in coopera on with a local community college to train electrical contractors and inspectors. Advocates on behalf of electric owners to encourage major employers to provide electric vehicle charging sta ons. Aus n, TX Home charging incen ves to residents who buy or lease a plug-in electric vehicle. Houston, TX Created consumer demand overlay maps to illustrate where electric vehicle charging sta ons will be needed in Sea le, WA the future. Vancouver, Installed charging sta ons in City owned parking lots to Canada encourage residents to become electric vehicle owners. Philadelphia, PA In partnership with New York City and Boston, Philadelphia hired an Electric Vehicle Policy Coordinator to examine the permi ng processes for the City and suggest opportuni es to make them more effi cient. The City provides $500 alterna ve fuel rebates to residents who purchase electric vehicles.
Figure 22. Example of Response Concepts from the Na onal Fire Protec on Associa on.
62 E V
Emergency Response Training Since the technology of an EV is diff erent from an internal-combus on engine, understanding of EV technology by emergency response teams is cri cal to prevent electric shock and other hazards. For example, when assessing a vehicle, the igni on can be off , but the motor can s ll be running. Training emergency response teams to know about these diff erent technologies is essen al as more vehicles are released into the market. Currently, the Na onal Fire Protec on Associa on is taking measures to help educate and train fi re fi ghters and other response teams on EV technology. More informa on can be found at: h p://www.evsafetytraining.org
Ba ery Recycling According to the Ba ery Council, 95% of all ba ery lead is recycled. For lead-acid ba eries, this helps keep the cost low, and helps perpetuate environmentally friendly prac ces41. There are approximately fi een ba ery recycling loca ons in North America. The capacity and loca ons of these recycling plants should expanded as mobility sources rely on ba eries instead of combus ble fuel. In the US, ba ery recycling and solid waste in general is regulated by the Resource Conserva on and Recovery Act (RCRA).
Local Electric Vehicle Related Companies Zero Motorcycles, Sco s Valley, CA Started in Santa Cruz in 2006, Zero Motorcycles produces high performance electric motorcycles that u lize the patented Z-Force™ electric powertrain. Currently, there are fi ve electric models specializing in dirt biking, street riding and dual sport categories. These are the ZERO DSTM (dual sport), ZERO STM (street), ZERO XUTM (urban cross), ZERO MXTM (motocross), and the ZERO FXTM (trail). The electric motorcycles are also able to charge u lizing the standard 110V and 220V inputs that equate to Level 1 and Level 2 charging and have J1772 and CHAdeMO DC fast charge op onal accessories. For more informa on visit: h p://www.zeromotorcycles.com/
Green Vehicles, Salinas, CA While Green Vehicles closed its doors in the Summer of 2011, it is important to note its presence in the Monterey Bay Area, as this area does have the ability to a ract green jobs. Started in 2008, the Salinas headquartered company built
41 (ETC), E. T., & Americas, E. V. (1995). Electric Vehicle Community Market Launch Manual: A Guide to Prepare Your Community for Electric Vehicles. U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Transporta on. 63 Needs and Resources for EV Success
Local Support Groups Currently, in the Monterey Bay Area there are many resources for EV drivers, municipali es, private companies, and the public at large. Below are several resources that exist as of September 2011.
Monterey Bay Electric Vehicle Alliance (MBEVA) Contacts: Sharon Sarris, [email protected], Kris Markey, [email protected] www.mbeva.org
The Monterey Bay Electric Vehicle Alliance (MBEVA) is a California grass-roots, public-private partnership comprised of diverse stakeholders in the tri-county region of Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz coun es whose overall goal is to help the region prepare for the wide variety of electric vehicles coming to market in the next few years. MBEVA was formed in March 2009 at the Monterey College of Law in Seaside and since then has held regular general mee ngs hosted by the IBEW Local 234 in Castroville.
Currently, the MBEVA goals include: • Increase funding for, and installa on of, publicly-available EV charging sta ons • Ensure local governments adopt suppor ve policies, including streamlined EV charging sta on permit processing and increased number of EVs in their fl eets • Increase public awareness about plug-in electric and hybrid electric vehicles • Increase training of the local workforce for green jobs related to the EV industry, and a ract electric vehicle businesses to the region.
It should also be noted that MBEVA has spearheaded most of the grants to bring EV charging sta ons to the Monterey Bay Area, including the ini al grant wri ng for this report. The collabora on of MBEVA with both public and private en es has made it one of the leading EV community organiza ons in the country, and other regions are looking to MBEVAs as they prepare their own communi es for EVs.
Electric Auto Associa on, Central Coast Chapter Contact: Will Becket, will@becke s.ws h p://www.becke s.ws/eaa/
The Electric Auto Associa on (EAA) is a na onal non-profi t organiza on,501(c) (3), formed in 1967 to promote the use of electrical vehicles as a viable transporta on alterna ve that is effi cient, economical and ecological.
64 E V
Central Coast Clean Ci es Coali on, San Luis Obispo, CA Contact: Melissa Guise, [email protected] h p://www.c-5.org/
Greater Bay Area EV Corridor contact: Richard Schorske, Ex. Director, EV Communi es Alliance [email protected] h p://www.energy.ca.gov/2010-ALT-1/documents/2010-10-19_workshop/ presenta ons/Greater_Bay_Area_EV_Corridor_Project_Overview_2010-10_18. pdf
Plug-In America h p://www.pluginamerica.org/
Figure 23. Webpage for www.mbeva.org. This webpage was put together by Mike Zeller.
65 Needs and Resources for EV Success
Figure 24. Poten al Structure for a Community Outreach Website for EVs.
Who can do it? – YƵĂůŝĮĞĚ Electricians List
ŚĂƌŐŝŶŐ^ƚĂƟŽŶ Permits Required Home Charge InstallaƟon (by City) Guide
EV Charge InspĞĐƟon ^ƚĂƟŽŶEĞƚǁŽƌŬ (Contacts by City) I need to charge my car Out and About BaƩery Switching >ŽĐĂƟŽŶƐ I Own an EV Employer While at Work Resource Guide
I need to List of qualiĮĞĚ Mechanics in maintain my car the Region
EV Facts Costs, Smart Grid (Selling power GHG ƌĞĚƵĐƟŽŶƐ͕ back to the etc Grid?)
Vehicles & Dealers I Want to Own Charging an EV Links to EV ^ƚĂƟŽŶ Charger Maps >ŽĐĂƟŽŶƐ
Charging ^ƚĂƟŽŶ Monterey Bay /ŶƐƚĂůůĂƟŽŶ Area Electric Guide Vehicle Charging ^ƚĂƟŽŶ Who can do it? Community Installa on ʹYƵĂůŝĮĞĚ Ɵ Electricians List Resources Guide I am a Permits Required (by City) Business Who will Charge here? Owner and InspecƟons (Contacts by want to (Smart Grid City) provide an EV WŽƚĞŶƟĂů͍Ϳ Charging LEED ^ƚĂƟŽŶ ĞƌƟĮĐĂƟŽŶ I am in the (Carbon Credits?) Vehicle Maintenance Industry and EV Maintenance Training want to Resources Provide EV Support
I make EV related Products and want to Partner/Provide Resources/Mov e my business to the Monterey Bay Area 66 E V
67 LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND
E V
E V
E V
68 E V
Legisla ve Background State Legisla on The California Global Warming Solu ons Act of 2006 (AB 32) requires the state to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and 80% below 1990 levels by 205042. In order to do this, the California Climate Change Scoping Plan43, adopted in 2008, provides the overarching framework for achieving the goals set forth in 2006. This framework has six key elements, including the Zero Emissions Vehicle Program and Low Carbon Fuel Standards (LCFS), and expects that as much as 1/3 of the fl eet in California by 2030 will need to be made up of ba ery-electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids and fuel cell vehicles to help meet the goals of AB 32.
Table 18. Key Elements to meet AB 32. Expanding and strengthening exis ng energy effi ciency programs as well as building and appliance standards. Achieving a statewide renewable energy mix of 33 percent. Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Ini a ve partner programs to create a regional market system. Establishing targets for transporta on-related greenhouse gas emissions for regions throughout California and pursuing policies and incen ves to achieve those targets.** Adop ng and implemen ng measures pursuant to exis ng State laws and policies, including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard.** Crea ng targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global warming poten al gases, and a fee to fund the administra ve costs of the State’s long-term commitment to AB 32 implementa on. **Pertains to the transporta on sector.
Source: CARB 200844.
42 Execu ve Order S-3-05. 43 California Air Resources Board. (2008). Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Sacramento: State of California. 44 California Air Resources Board. (2008). Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Sacramento: State of California.
69 Legisla ve Background
Table 19. The Climate Change Scoping Plan Recommended Mi ga on Measures. Reduc ons Counted Towards
Recommended Reduc on Measures 2020 Target (MMTCO2E) Es mated Reduc ons Resul ng From the Combina on of Cap-and-trade Program and 146.7 Complementary Measures California Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards 31.7 Implement Pavley standards Develop Pavley II light-duty vehicle standards Energy Effi ciency 26.3 Increase CHP genera on by 30,000 GWh Building/appliance effi ciency, new programs, etc. Solar Water Hea ng (AB 1470 goal) Renewables Por olio Standard (33% by 2020) 21.3 Low Carbon Fuel Standard 15 Regional Transporta on-Related GHG Targets 5 Vehicle Effi ciency Measures 4.5 Goods Movement 3.7 Ship Electrifi ca on at Ports System-Wide Effi ciency Improvements Million Solar Roofs 2.1 Medium/Heavy Duty Vehicles 1.4 Heavy-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduc on (Aerodynamic Effi ciency) Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicle Hybridiza on High Speed Rail 1.0 Industrial Measures (for sources covered under cap-and-trade 0.3 program) Refi nery Measures Energy Effi ciency & Co-Benefi ts Audits Addi onal Reduc ons Necessary to Achieve the Cap 34.4 ESTIMATED REDUCTIONS FROM UNCAPPED SOURCES/SECTORS 27.3 High Global Warming Poten al Gas Measures 20.2 Sustainable Forests 5.0 Industrial Measures (for sources not covered under cap and trade 1.1 program) Oil and Gas Extrac on and Transmission Recycling and Waste (landfi ll methane capture) 1.0 TOTAL REDUCTIONS COUNTED TOWARDS 2020 TARGET 174 Source: CARB 2008.
70 E V
Electrifi ca on of the transporta on sector is extremely important to reduce the emissions related to the transporta on sector. The California Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards (commonly referred to as Pavley I and II), the Renewables Por olio Standard, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and the Vehicle Effi ciency Measures all contribute modifi ca ons of the mix of vehicles in the light duty car and truck fl eet in California, and how they are powered. The remaining GHG emission reduc ons from the transporta on sector will be met through SB 375, which seeks to reduce the overall VMT of each region by coordina ng land use and transporta on planning. The greenhouse gas savings achieved by EVs cannot be used to meet SB 375 goals as this component of the climate change legisla on is concerned with VMT.
California Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards The three following programs are being employed to address GHG emissions from passenger vehicles. Passenger vehicle GHG emissions account for approximately 30 percent of California’s total emissions. This three-pronged strategy seeks to reduce GHG from vehicles, reduce the carbon content of the fuel the vehicles burn, and reduce the number of miles these vehicles travel.45
Pavley Bill I & II (California AB 1493) The Pavley bill increases the fuel economy standards for new passenger vehicles sold in California to 37 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2016. By increasing the fuel effi ciency standards for new vehicles, the overall fuel effi ciency of the en re vehicle “fl eet” will also be increased. This program is currently being adopted by other states in the US; however, they must also receive waivers from the Environmental Protec on Agency (EPA) for implementa on. In 2002, Pavley I was originally passed by the legislature, however, the regula ons were not employed un l 2009 a er EPA granted California the authority to implement their own GHG emission reduc on standards for new passenger cars, light trucks and SUVs.
Pavley I and II go above and beyond the US Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (CAFE), and hence, an exemp on from EPA was required. The latest CAFE standards require auto manufacturers to have cars exceed 27.5 mpg and light trucks exceed 20.7 mpg. These are s ll considered some of the lowest fl eet average fuel economy standards amongst fi rst world na ons.
45 California Air Resources Board. (2008). Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Sacramento: State of California.
71 Legisla ve Background
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 require auto makers to increase their fl eet effi ciency to 35 mpg by 2020, four years behind the Pavley standards. In prepara on for mee ng these standards, and avoiding paying penal es for not mee ng CAFE standards, many auto makers are including hybrid or electric vehicles (EVs) in their fl eet mix.
While not mee ng CAFE standards has always required auto makers to pay a fee, Pavley will u lize a fee-bate program, combining rebates for low emi ng vehicles and fees for high-emi ng vehicles.
Zero Emissions Vehicle Program (ZEV) The ZEV program requires the placement of hundreds of vehicles that produce zero emissions, which includes hydrogen fuel cell and ba ery electric vehicles and thousands of near-zero emission vehicles (plug-in hybrids, conven onal hybrids) by 2012, and even more by 2015.
Planning for the infrastructure needs to facilitate the charging requirements for these vehicles is the essence of this plan. While it is recognized that the ZEV program will not supply all the EVs and PHEVs that will require charging infrastructure, this program will speed the adop on of ZEV vehicles.
Air Quality Improvement Program/Alterna ve and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (AB 118) AB 118 authorizes CARB to administer the Air Quality Improvement Program, which supplies approximately $50 million per year in grants to fund clean vehicle and equipment projects, and the CEC to spend up to $120 million a year (from 2008 – 2015) to “develop, demonstrate and deploy innova ve technologies to transform California’s fuel and vehicle types.” In 2010, the Monterey Bay Electric Vehicle Alliance (MBEVA) partnered with groups in the San Francisco Bay Area in an applica on for EV charging sta ons from this fund. In addi on, Zero Motorcycles and Green Vehicles, two electric vehicle manufacturers in the Monterey Bay Area, also received funds as part of AB 118 programs.
Renewables Por olio Standard (33% by 2020) The CEC es mated in 2008 that approximately 12 percent of California’s retail electric load was being met with renewable sources, including wind, solar, hydroelectric, geothermal, biomass, anaerobic diges on, and landfi ll gas. Investor owned u li es (IOUs) are obligated by SB 107 to increase their share of renewables in their electricity por olios to 20 percent by 2010, and publicly owned u li es (POUs) are encouraged but not required to do the same. However, several POUs in the state have already adopted policies to achieve 20 percent or greater by 2010 or 2011.
72 E V
Increasing the amount of renewable energy sources ed to the grid will be especially important for EVs – the type of electrical power they u lize is essen ally the amount of GHGs produced per mile. Therefore, an EV that u lizes electricity derived from solar is essen ally “cleaner” than an EV that uses electricity derived from burning coal, even though neither car produces any direct tailpipe emissions.
Low Carbon Fuel Standards (LCFS) The Low Carbon Fuel Standards (LCFS) pushes fuel manufacturers to produce and market fuels that are less carbon intensive. Specifi cally, AB 32 calls for a 10 percent reduc on in the carbon intensity of California’s transporta on fuels by 2020.
Regional Transporta on-Related GHG Targets SB 375, adopted in 2008, requires CARB to set regional transporta on-related GHG targets to reduce emissions from passenger vehicles. Each of California’s 18 metropolitan planning organiza ons (MPOs) have been given target greenhouse gas reduc ons for their region. AMBAG is the Monterey Bay Area MPO, and as such, the regional target is a 0 percent change in per capita GHG emissions by 2020, and a -5 percent per capita decrease by 2035.
Each MPO must demonstrate that they will be able to meet their target through modeling for the projects in their long range transporta on plan. This will determine which transporta on projects within the region are included in the long range transporta on plan. Principally, the way to achieve the targets would be to reduce per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by growing in a more sustainable manner. Please see AMBAG’s Envisioning the Monterey Bay Area: a Blueprint for Sustainable Growth and Smart Infrastructure for more informa on about SB 375 and the related Sustainable Communi es Strategy (SCS).
Vehicle Effi ciency This program seeks to reduce GHG emissions by ensuring that vehicles are opera ng at their most effi cient levels, for example ensuring that res are properly infl ated, and reducing the need for air condi oning. These measures will also enable EVs to drive for a longer period of me before having to be recharged.
73 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low County Boundaries Legend Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Index Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Created By: JasonAdelaars, Intern o 5Miles 01020 Figure 25.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential Monterey Bay Area Bay Monterey 74 E V High Low County Boundaries Legend Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
o 1Miles
024 Salinas Valley Salinas o 4Miles 0816 Figure 26.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential Monterey Bay Monterey 75 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Level 1 Only 1 Level Only 2 Level Level& 1 Level 2 Proposed County Boundaries Legend Highways PEV Stations Data Sources: Sources: Data Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Existing/Proposed Date: June 2013Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created o 1Miles 024 101
§ ¨ ¦ Salinas Valley Salinas o 156 O P 101 § ¨ ¦ 101 § ¨ ¦ 4Miles 68 156 O P O P 0816 1 O P 1 O P 17 O P Figure 27.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Intensity Activity on Vehicle Based Areas Charging Potential Monterey Bay Monterey 76 E V High Low City Boundary City Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 1 & Level 2 Proposed County Boundaries County Legend PEV Stations PEV Highways Data Sources: Sources: Data Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Existing/Proposed Existing/Proposed Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Date: June 2013 Infrastructure Electric Name:Project Vehicle Adelaars,Intern Created By: Jason o 5 § ¨ ¦ 101 § ¨ ¦ 10 Miles 198 O P 02040 25 O P 1 O P 101 § ¨ ¦ 68 O P 1 O P
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Intensity Activity on Vehicle Based Areas Charging Potential Monterey County Monterey Figure 28. 77 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas Low High City Boundary City Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Potential Charging Potential Infrastructure Areas Legend PEV Stations Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Existing/ Proposed Vehicle Activity Vehicle Index Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan By: JasonCreated Adelaars, Intern
o
AY
R
D
NADA CT TRL OYO
RD R
CA
AR
RIO VISTA RIO
R
GUERITA W GUERITA
O D O
D
N L SEGU VALLEY EL
MAR
P
AN CARM
RY
D
BL CHO RAN MEL CAR
D R D L
FIE
ST A E
PL
GREENFIELD PL PL
IELD D R
GEF R
ED A R W D FLANDERS MORSE D MESA PL L S PL Y P FLANDER LLE
VA HWY 1 DR DR MESA 0.125 Miles
CARMEL HILLS
AY
1 W
¬ « RO DR RO
S
VE A
SHAFTER WAY AK PL OLIVER RD
O 00.250.5 REVI
Y LAZAR T 3RD ALLEY AY
RANDALL W
AVE
TH AVE TH
ST Y
ERE 7 NT
MO
VALLEY WA 4TH
ON RD ON
L
TR
LOBOS ST LOBOS
HATT
Y W Y LOWER Y NEWBERR Y PERR
ARPENTER ST ARPENTER C
D OREST R OREST F
VE
GUADALUPE ST GUADALUPE V
A
V
AVE A RIO RD
ITA ST ITA R TA SAN CRESPI AV CRESPI
2ND
1ST IN VIEW A
A
VIZCAINO VIZCAINO AVE T PICO AVE PICO
A FE S FE A T SAN D AVE UNT ST FE SANTA 1TH
VE 1
3R
6TH AVE MO
A
TH AVE RES ST RES R 5 TO
9TH
E
AVE
UNIPERO J
JUNIPERO AVE JUNIPERO
NIPERO AVE NIPERO JU
T AV T
AY
A AVE W AVE 1S
MISSION ST MISSION
ALT AN LASUEN DR LASUEN
ST CARLOS CARLOS
VISTA SAN
VE ISC CAMINO DEL MONTE DEL CAMINO
A DOLORES ST DOLORES H
2ND AVE
T
VE RANC
12 F ST COLN N I L
D R
PESCADERO
N ST N L INCO E L
3RD A
V
A
E ST AVE DE V VER MONTE
H
T
AVE
13TH
U ST 10 ST CASANOVA
PALO AVE TH AVE 4 9TH A Z AVE 8TH
VE LOPE H AVE
E VE LUCIA AVE 14TH A
V A 7T KER AVE
15TH AVE AMINO REAL AMINO
6TH C O ST E
EL OCEAN AVE 1
WAL
11TH A SANT
IO AVE IO N CARM TO SAN AN SAN 12TH A
TH AV
ENIC RD ENIC C CARMELO ST CARMELO
S 4
1
E
EW AV EW
RIO AVE RIO
RMEL WAY RMEL
E EY VI EY
CA AV
NTEEN MILE D VALL
E
ELLA ELLA
B
VE V
PL E ISA A
P
S O T HILL
RESPI LN
C BAY VIEW VIEW BAY Figure 29.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential City of Carmel-by-the-Sea of City 78 E V High Low City Boundary City Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Potential ChargingPotential Infrastructure Areas Legend PEV Stations Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Index Activity Vehicle Existing/Proposed Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
o
E VIA LO S TU S
LARES
K
I
D
LON
K
A
N
ITA
G
LA
L
A VI
LE D RANCHO DEL ROB
RD
AL O
R R OLMAN VALLE VISTA
PAR R
A H
CH E
R
OT DE ESTE P CALLE 0.25 Miles
EL EL NK RD
LAC LN SOUTHBA LI D R ILPITAS T UILINE RD POPPY RDH ESQ
VIA M RD Y TA
FLIG 00.51
RD IO RD VIS WA O
FORD R ANCAS C
EL STA DEL I
GUNA E
A D CUEN EL CAMINITO CAMINITO EL A L T Y
N A DRAS BL EL E A W BUENA V I NTE P
ST
LUPIN LN VIA CO ER T MERRILL VES
CEN
OAKS
JET LN RD T VILLAGE DR
MORRO LN ILO
LOMA AZY P L L HEM E NO DE TRA O CRESTA I R DE D PAS WOODSI CAM
L DR URE
LA
RD
A A Y
TRY CLUB DR CLUB TRY O HONDO
AS
UN P
O PANETT
C
RAL RD RAL
RRACE WA RRACE
TE
D L DE AMA DE
NYON RD
A UARD R UARD C OW P
D MARQ D MEA R DLE ZAS CHO RD D RAN D
MI
EY R EAST GAR DA RD DA
RROS L
N O
O
S Z S
D OR R D B ALISO S R
CARMEL VAL A VIA LO VIA RZ GA ST WE
RIO DEL
PASO
TREE LN TREE INE P
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential CarmelValley Village Figure 30. 79 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Existing/Proposed Vehicle Activity Index Activity Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan By: Created Jason Adelaars, Intern o
RD K
AR
P RY R D
DA R
E ST N
V
ESCAL OU
NCH M B
H
RA
N N
ERRA A
CT A
YOLANDA YOLANDA SOUT
SI Y ORE
R MO
M
T S
ITE M
YOSE
T
C EN JI EN NTU NTU CA G
CALLE DEL OAKS
LAND ST LAND
H HIG ARDENS
EY G 0.125 Miles DEL R QUAIL RUN CT
SILER LN
AVE R T RIDGE R BUENA ST BUENA D
AS INOS PHEASAN
M
DR NC
0 0.25 0.5
TER AND AND AVIL H
VOE PL VOE N N
G ST G RIN PLU
WA LOS E 68
O P
E
V TA CIR
CT
L S CT
E L L A A
ISABE
CARLTO
E
T S C S A GL
DOU OL
B CITO
U
A
S T
UENDALE AVE
Q
AVE E
EEN C EEN PL ER SETT
ST AV BUENA BUENA E E NOCH RD ALL A
B GR RK
KIM WO
TO CT TO
CT ROSIT I
L
NO NO
IE C MO
ST ADAIR PL
ANA ANA
ST
D
WEE T D VE L
A CT ARBOR P T DE
ANTA
H A
S
ST OC OC D
MO MAL Y
L
P PALOMAR
VIA VER VIA NOCH NOCH
GREE WA
ROUSC ST FER FER A
SH S
DR LU
GE T N
ANNE C
SUZ A
IGHLANDER IGHLANDER 218
O P H
R ST R ELE HE W
Monterey PeninsulaAirport
T S ON ON RS CA
R ZO CT ZO
N R D
E
R A D LO L D LSTON A R R PORTO
RPORT LVD
PAT WAY PAT AI NT B NT
FREMO
E SHIRL STED RD STED M OL
VE R I
A
C E
Y IS A
AV
LW D E D M LI ANC R
R ILLIAMS AV
F
W
EUC
DEN
ST RIN MA
E
AV Y E
LS
HA
GAR D
E R
AV OXTON
E AVE E
ST
CAIN CAIN
V
MC
E A
V
AVE
AY
W
A SON ER
RAMONA HEND ENGLISH ST KOLB ST
E ALLEY
R A AV BURGH
T OND RD
CT HAMM OHARE RK D RK DEN AR G ANOV EDIN
S A
K DR K
P ST
CA IC
ONT S ONT
EE M
LN
KY D
HANNON AVE S ERW
CE ST
L
FRE
UN OHARE
D RU
LITTLENESS AVE LITTLENESS IVY B Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential
Figure 31. Del Rey Oaks Rey Del 80 E V Low High City Boundary City Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Index Vehicle Existing/Proposed
Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Created By: JasonAdelaars, Intern O
o
D MONTE DEL OR DEL MONTE
ELLO OL R BLACKIE L S DE TE E NTE B N LC O MO AGUA DU M IENTE
AGUA CAL
Y W A OM MIRA L MIRA K COMMERCIAL P COMMERCIAL AZUL
CIELO
E BLVD E
L
IL
V
TRO CAS CARA MIA PKWY
183 O P INS
L E AVE COL ONT DEL M
T RO S CAST
RD AVE BENSON ST ER
DEL MONTE Y
ST ST
N ST E CKSO WA
JA T
KO T T
PALMER ERRI AIN ST AIN
T ST K OD S OD
S M M SH ST SH 0.25 Miles L OA L TE WO PRESS ST AX WAL CY
ST
MORO COJO ST COJO MORO ELL ST XT
A
O ST O T
IC
SALINAS T RO ST RO R S IS ST
IGHT S AV PAJA
D HA
UGALL T
D R
00.51
O O
OLE S OLE MCDO
T O
P
OR
UNION ST UNION L S ST M
Y PRESTON ST PRESTON IPS LN LE L AXTEL A HILL
SEYMOUR P R ST E UNION B ALLEY OM
WAY P
VIA LINDA PL MCDOUGALL ST
T
BLEVINS S ICO
IL ST ST CRANE E R
G
T
S
ST
Z
ST
R SPEEGLE SPEEGLE
CHE T
SAN COOPE
ERA S
D ST D
TEMBLAD D 156 O P
MEA R
ASHINGTON ST ASHINGTON
W RESTON P 1 O P Figure 32.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential Castroville 81 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Existing/Proposed Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created o
SON RD
IVER
RD
ORIA GL
RD 0.25 Miles
RNETTI JOHNSON CANYON R CANYON JOHNSON TAVE
RAMP 00.51
D PKWY OL I CIR HER JUR 101 § ¨ ¦ OLAIS DR
CHAR Y DR DR RN JERSE DR R LONGHO ANGUS L CI HAE E MIC GRACE CIR FANO C ST Y DR ON RD
NC
NNA RI DR RVIEW
C RD FAI RDO LAN CT HA I
C NCON AB
RI G ST C
KO ST T
EL ST B
T ST T A S A NOE RD 1S
A L DR
F ST
D
VISTA AVE VISTA
ELO ELO N CI
2
DR
TH ST TH
4
ZINFANDE ST 3RD
ST
BERNET
O T
ST 5TH ST 5TH
CA
H ST
ELK
T A ELLIOT 6 T DAY S ST
R AL
CENTE ST 7TH
T
8TH ST 8TH
S
9TH ST 9TH
10TH
R R R
S RIVE S
E
NZAL D LN D
E O
G ASSOCIAT T S TA
AL
RD
CORDA
A RD T T
FOLE Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential
Figure 33. City of Gonzales Cityof 82 E V High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations PEV Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Vehicle Index Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Created By: JasonAdelaars, Intern
o
RD A A
1ST ST
PINOS S
D E R
SA O
ESPIN
E
V
A
M AVE M
L
E
E
OAK OAK
LE AV LE APP
ST N L 2ND A LN SAN SU TRICI PA
0.25 Miles
ST D DR RD EYAR DR
VIN DY NOSA
NAY DR VERDE O
N AVE AL
URGUN P
ESPI B AVE E
RDO OT A PIN PL REAL 00.51
CH O
MA RAMP IN
K AV K T CAM
VE S
A
T OA 4TH
S
D AVE ANA
3R T
PALM L
VEN
5TH ST E REA
E AV
6TH ST
E T CAMINO
V S
APLE APLE
RRY AV RRY TH
7 M
E
PINE AVE PINE S WAY ST
CHE H
AV
8T
R WALNUT A WALNUT
TEHAMA LER
CALAVERA 9TH ST TY
ST AVE LM
HEIDI D HEIDI 7TH ST PA H 8T 10TH ST T L OOD DR
Y 11TH S LMW WA E
CAMINO REA
EL LN
K AVE K DART WAY DART
ONALD ONALD
A
D
VE O
A LARSON T
MC N CT S
TO I DR VE TH AVE 2 101 ESS ESS N
§ ¨ ¦ T IF O 1
CL LE
PR H S PL
UE A UE
T P O Y
E 10 R C
RANSCI AP
D AVE CLES
AV F
ONE DR ONE RENF
PASQ O DR
ICKS DR ICKS PINNA CHAL NTONI
VINGSTON R H A
LI CHERRY N GAVILAN DR GAVILAN PALOMA DR PALOMA A S L
CAMINO REA
ORRIS AVE ORRIS M IR H ST C 2T 1 IAN T S
E ICTOR
V 13TH
PINE AV PINE
E
THORNE RD THORNE TH ST
V 14
A
SS
PRE
E CY
V
A
OAK
AV PINE PINE
AL ST
AN
NE AV NE C Figure 34. PI
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Charging Intensity Areas BasedVehicle on Potential City of Greenfield Cityof 83 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Potential Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created o
E
VERD
MESA
LONOAK RD LONOAK
D
R
WATER
ER BITT
Y WA L 0.25 Miles INDUSTRIA
JAYNE ST 00.51
L P AIRPORT RD VE
A N ST N
VE OVE LLA DR LLA
I
V GR ST
RAILROAD LSO
AN 1ST ST CAR
CHESTNUT A
VIVI ST
2ND ST ST N
SETT R PEARL ST PEARL
VISIO DR
BAS OLF D DI G DR EY ST T ETZ RD DEN
M PL R ACH ST CO 3RD S T T VISTA
E ST T S FO B E E O
ZO
RI APL ST LYNN M RUSS S 7TH ST ECOND S L S HURST AV P AN LOREN A
S VIST
T T
P ST VANDER ST LLIS S O E D AV ISH ONTE B M ANAL NGS PL DRE C
KI MIL DR
KING ST KING OLLINS S OLLINS
C RIVER RIVER
RD DR IO WAY ST WAY
D
ELS ST W
CK O
E L ROA
B
N ANTON N SPR WIL
R Y CR SA A UCE D ADW
SPR BRO
NDRINGHAM ST NDRINGHAM SA
VE LEEDS A
ORD AVE ORD X AVE SUSSE E KEATS AV
BEDF KET AVE C BLUFF N RD JOLO
NANTU
CEMETERY
AL AVE CENTR
PETTITT 101 § ¨ ¦ Figure 35.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential City of King City King of City 84 E V High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Potential Areas Infrastructure Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV Data; Employment 2010 InfoUSA AMBAG Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
o
RD
CT
IMJIN IMJIN
OWN CT OWN
LANDRUM LANDRUM
DY CT DY
BR REA
CT WITTENMYER
T
C
R
D
Y
E ON IL PREST
BA
WAHL CT
R MWHA CT MWHA
D
KU
HUR DR HUR AS AVE AS N
RAMS
SALI
T CIR MACART
S CT S I AB
CT S L
EL
YER YER IN CT
BA
DR 0.125 Miles
S
T T FORE
T YER ST YER BA
CHO LYNSCO L LLO RD P
E
IS AVE K 0 0.25 0.5
C R
I
D
RIV T
T C
C LEW
BOS R BAYER R D R PL DSO E
TE
AV E CIR CARMELO ST
WIN
X S E AN
FERSON
AVE JE F
TVIEW CT TVIEW
R EL FERRI JE R
MAR RD CI
L MAR R CRES
ALLMON ST ALLMON
SE AVE SE
R T I
CARM CI HILLIP FLOWER FLOWER
DEL D P
QUEBRADA DEL MAR SUNRI
IR ENA C EDDY VE OSTA DE R
R PL A
LN R LN
C I RD C T R
S N
3RD
EST RD EST NEY
CIR WOOD D WOOD
T ION EASA EDDY ST EDDY
VILLA
HI PL ELT D
RED LAS LN LAS
LINCO IR K
DE FOR DE W
C RVAT NIC
AVE
OAK CIR IR
RK
A C I
IR PA ROOSEV
IR RESE DR NG C NG
ORN
E
NCE AVE NCE
ULER
YOU
N C N
V
R ACH RD TT
E
O
A
E D
SH
GT
CALIF
O O
NT
END
BE E HIN
R
ST P I
EVER E
OTT C
WAS
DR EL DR EL
IND
NG
I CRESC CT KING
CHA
D
I VIK
K CIR K
LN ERNEY M
Y C B E R E
I
E B
V
KENNEDY KENNEDY
T BUS
N
MELAN L FREDRI GHN A GHN
EN C EN
VAU
E ELL
KING
NO
I
IA CIR IA V
VI
M N
VE AY
GERALD CIR GERALD W N A N INDSEY ST
L
BEGO EST A CIR FITZ
USA A DEL CA DEL A
S VIST RSON
LIEVERY
HILLCR A R ST
ST
P EACREST AVE EACREST WEBER CIR S
LKE
T CENT
LN WA R
CRES
RA
E
AVE
LN R V
R
H H
VE T TA D TA CI 4
X
LL ST LL
MER NET
MA A Z
RTI C BENNETT
SWE
AVE
SEASIDE C SEASIDE
N MONTE BLVD MONTE R
MO E E CT
A
DEL
R OW T
AV C
T
E REINDOLLAR A
V
ADDON PL A ES ARRIS
P BBIE D M H
T L E
E CR 12TH ST C R
E TRAIL AL GRANT S
DE CI
SID T
AVE AS HILL S AV
SEA S R
O CO RE SEENO
HIL IR
VE D ARINA CYP A M
OBIN DR R DR LAKE LM HAYES C A ER ST P DR
ER
NG BOOK E
V
A
D N
MESSI 2
T
S
13TH
AVE 1 CT 2ND LAKE O P
IN RD
IMJ
VE
T A
1S
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential City of Marina of City Figure 36. 85 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary Potential Charging Areas Infrastructure Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Index Activity Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
E ST
EELER
V WH
TRAIL
ETZ RD ETZ o M E
Y A
V R
VE
B VE OASTAL OASTAL
C L
A N D
AVE AY A BLVD AVE HI A VE ALL A
OR
A
G RD RPORT
VE
L ST FREMONT RALSTO AI
AD TIO RD OADW AVE
KIMB
AVE
FEL
VE
LIFORNIA LIFORNIA AVE AM PALM L A AVE
BR N S
OMA A AVE
S
T E CA ST ELM
RT
L TRAI L E
LID
ILTO
NCI MAR MAR SON
V C L TA S
R AV
M
LLIAM OLMSTED A
BLVD COU
ORTIZ AVE
OASTA EU
FRA WI
E UNES DR UNES E
HA
C HAS
LDE VE AR
VISTA DE VISTA NT A S E H A T
LISH ST
AND D AND S MO
S E E ORANGE ENG CT
AVE EN
DEL DEL ADOR AV ASANOV HWY 1 HWY C ALSEY AVE GARD
HAR
Monterey Peninsula Airport Peninsula Monterey SS AV SS H
AM AVE
O RGH RGH
T H ST ON D
E N
R
V IS N
CE LN CE N
IN S GL DR LERWICK
HA RE
S A S N E
E R
E EDINBU
A AVE LITTLENE
D
VIRG BRU
VE E
ON OHA K
A
BERT
AVE NA AV NA T
O GARD
AR RO
AN RAM
INA AV R
ENCI P G
LA V Y
DE SK
T ST T VE MONTECIT A A
N AY
MON
E MO VE RD ROUND A A
R A FR
N RG I I
V
A FA OAKS DR OAKS 0.25 Miles
DEL CASA VERDE W TWIN
DR 68
O P
AVE N
OLD SALINAS HWY SALINAS OLD
EST AVE EST E
VE
R RAY RAY CANYON
EC N
SP
IDE A IDE Y
GARD OOL
UN 00.51 T AN PL AN
EL V
SYL
D SEAFOAM AVE SEAFOAM SCH S
RD MONTSALAS DR
SYLVAN JOS
DR
LAKE LAKE
R
D
T
AGUAJ I TO TO E RD RD N
O MORSE
RTH S RTH ST
D
NO
DR
S STRO R RD FARRAGUT AVE
SLOAT CA IL OMA
A
TH T
AVE T
ST S
L TR OCEAN
ARK ARK
HY RD HY
N DR N
M
ETTS RD ETTS
TH
T
ST
ST
8 2ND S 2ND K
E 10TH LEA
V IC H S H
TH TH
OASTA ERGI
7TH
PARK A R
1ST ST 1ST T
6
B
C 5T IR
HALSEY DR HALSEY
S
C
E
LEIDIG LAK DERA
T
S
LAVAN
VIA
MONT
CIR
1
FRE D
O P SHNET RD SHNET
N FI ANYON RD ANYON ST
E S ST L
CORTE
S C S A I
LENWOO
IR
RY G
R RD SA E GUEROA ST GUEROA
FI M MIRAD PE VIA
CHURCH
ST
R
T
EL MONTE AV S
E A CIR DORADO DORADO
L E
D ST EGO T
YLER ST YLER
T ST PEARL BR
A
MES
ADO ST ADO RD ST EBS
A
Y ALVAR R W T T
L
E
ASS S ASS A
VE
C
FOAM ST A
S S ST
E A EE LN
ST MESA ALTA
R V
E PIERC OTT ST ST N
N O H ARTILL L RD SYLVAN
C A
C ST C CARME MU
FI
S ST BUREN D
E AV E SEENO ST PACI VAN
D
I
G RD G
ROW ST
N Y I
N D ST DON
AVE OU
AVE ST LARK MADISO D
T
T E REES WI
NNER S
T S
AN AN
E
CA USE S AV
WAVE ST TSON
T A
Y ST Y W ST
A
D
T S N RY
R E
E LAM
A LIGHTHO ST DICKM
VD E
DRAKE ILL
L ST RD ON GHT
I FRANKLIN VIS ENA
B ST AY
TON S TON MARTI CL EL U
T R
NFANT RT
ST I
LAINE S D B
A W ARS
R A A
VE AWTHORN E I
E
COL
C
T V
H DEN AVE IN
T A V
ENC LAM ST ITO
T
BEL P I
EAN VIEW ER S N
S R
WA EL
K ST
UALA AVE
OC AR CH
IA IA SLOA ENCINA IA RCH H V
A T V
TCH A TCH
SERRA CAMI
A VENTUR A ISO
DLEY I
FI CED ARA
T P IA
V
RISON ST DR
V
S AVE R PINE S E T AVE T
OAK ST AR
ST ST EL N PIN 1 A EL
VIA D VIA
E N S PL
EVA O GS ISTA
COT HAR V R
G AV G D N
OOSEVELT S
E Y N MANN
R ELLI 3RD ST 3RD D DR I ER
R TE
H W A
V HN
PRES
2ND ST 2ND
IR OLED N AV N O J S MON
E A R VISTA DR VE
ST GAYUBA VIA MA
ST
A LEWIS AWTONRD RD NE ST NE
H L T
L AVE 4
LI ESS ST
DR
LILY ST SE RE DEL VIA HOFFM N
U DR N DR
PEARL ST CYPR ST TA
O O
NTRAL AV RD CREEK AVE ST GE RD Y
FILLMORE N STA VIS
LAURE PINE AVE T A
D AVE D RACE CUE
CE S DR
I G T
TOY
LE R CRAMDE 2ND
T
V
S IF
UCE R
H H CEL
T
ST
9 TERRY RST
LIGHTH DA A
3TH 11TH ST 11TH P 1 CE ST SPR LI Figure 37. LYNDONA S
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Charging Areas BasedVehicle IntensityPotential on City of Monterey Cityof 86 E V High Low City Boundary Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 1 & Level 2 Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG
Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle
Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
T
S
E
V
SEENO SEENO o
E A E
SID
AVE NNERY ROW REE
TRAIL T
CA S
E RD EWING
AL WAVE ST T S
ST AM
E AV
FO ANITA
COA ST DICKMAN DICKMAN
ST
RNE AVE PATTON AVE CLAY CLAY
GHTHOUS KE RD I ST Y
L T
RA S
HAWTHO
D INFANTRY ST INFANTRY
LVD NE ST RD SON
LAI BOLIO RTILLER
T E A
VE DEN ST CAR IT L VE T
A K EAN VIEW B S BE PENCER S OC S PRIVAT WAINWRIGHT
LOAT AVE H
S C
AVE HER ST
AVE
T A SERRA
FIT ARC AVE CH E S HELLAM
N ARMY ST
PI FIT
DEWEY DEWEY TT AVE TT
O
ARDLEY
C
E
EVANS AVE RD
N
AVE
IA ST RES P 1ST ST 1ST
2ND ST 2ND
AVE
AN AN
T NS R NS
S
LLEY A KLIN ST ND ND
ST
2
A V
3RD ACAC Y ST
IL CARSO KIT T
E
1ST ST 1ST L
ST
L IRVING IRVING HOFFM
TH S TH D
4
2N FRAN
T
S OAK ST ST
RA
D 0.125 Miles
H H ST
T
5 3R N
ST Y WTO RD OLIO
LINE ST LINE
E B
6TH 6TH NE IS RD
4TH ST 4TH E E
TH ST TH LL 5
LEW CORPO 7TH ST 7TH S ST T ST A
ES A
PR V 00.250.5 ST
8TH ST 8TH Y ST
ARL C 6TH 6TH LEY
L PRI PE L AVE T
A LMORE
S L ST
ROW
N LN ST FI
D
E ST
8TH 8TH LEY
2ND TH TH T
7 L
ETT S GRACE
RD H A 9T E
A CENTRA CE AVE Y ST R ON LE RANGE RD
G RR ST F WT 10TH ST 10TH RI
RICK TE L
H ST H ST LA
H SPRU 12T
11T PARCE REY AVE REY
DAVID AV DAVID
NTE
MO VE
13TH ST 13TH H ST H Y
4T 1 E LYNDON ST
T A T CE ST
ALI ST
15TH ST 15TH
ALL E R
AVE
RES
2TH ST 2TH
1
AV
C
E ARMEL AYLO T C T
L AVE Y S
ILL TH ST TH
AVE
AV 3
1 GRAND AVE GRAND
H S
D IRVING LOTTIE
ALLE R ST
LAURE S
WELL THER
I
E E AVE ST 14TH OBO
W J N L ST SON
I E
P T
UNION ST SI MA
MERMAID AVE S OREST AVE OREST
F ALLEY JES
16TH ST 16TH
AVE RT RT
AVE 14TH ST 14TH
H ST H
T E
NT AVE
17
NTAIN
V TUA
U O ISADERO ST
ST S
FO V
BRIGGS AVE SHOP
E I TH ST TH AVE
E M DI
18
19TH E A NIPERO AVE W E V B
V
U DR RSE IE
A J Y
E
MO SEAV
BEAU ALL
E AVE ST PRUC
S PARK
US IBSON A E AVE D TEA
ACIFIC ACIFIC
MS
G V EY OL P
ALL JEWELL AV T VE A A
S T
T
IER
E R CYPRESS
VD
LIGHTHO C T
O AZ AV VE
W
SH A BOS SP Y 68
O RES
E L
ST
T
C
ITE
S HW MONT AVE
N NEX AVE A
WOOD ST WOOD D 19TH
GR SI
BAYVI BL HILL ST
E HILL
PIE
WILLOW ST WILLOW V
RD AVE RD
ST
ORE
O BLVD
NT A F CEDAR CEDAR LOCUST ST LOCUST
L MONTE L NUT ST NUT
E AL
D
W RANSF
SEMO
HESTNUT ST HESTNUT O C
PARK CT PARK R
Y ST Y
R
LE R
D T
T
FOREST FOREST
D
ST ER ER
T BEN
B
Y T
A
N
TIM LE D LE
L
ALDER
E C E
IDA IDA
O AVE O
Y
OOD
EEN MI EEN
WALCOTT W WALCOTT W T S
SAG KENET PL
RED
SEVEN
E
MAPLE S BENIT
ST
DMONT AV DMONT
SE
RINO PINES R PIE
RO A
T ST D
ON PL MEL AVE ST OR CIR DAY M S
SH L ES
R BLV PRESIDIO WALNUT WALNUT NG
AVA CO
IE CIR IE
UR
LA RD
PL
N GE E
O ST T
T
LOD
L P
CO CO PI NNET
D
R
MEL
EN OLN AV OLN JO RD JO E ST ST
GR
MILES AVE MILES
ER
DE EV C E
AVA
N
LIN
E AVE E
ACR
FOR
GROVE
E
E
OCKER AV OCKER CR
CO AVE AV ROCKER PI C
LVD RD B TRL N
AR S SILOM O A S E
R
RACCO
RD
A AJELL CONG M D LN NAME
G JO R REL
SET DR AU
IN L N RD RD
AVA TREASURE RD S T T A
SU N A
MIS SLO ORTEG UNSET DR UNSET S
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Charging Areas BasedVehicle IntensityPotential on City of Pacific Grove Pacific Cityof Figure 38. 87 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Potential Charging Potential Infrastructure Areas Legend PEV Stations PEV Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Vehicle Index Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Created By: JasonAdelaars, Intern
o
ABALA RD ABALA Z
E RD G
OLD STA
DR K L RD EL ALISA DR N OR H PKY ACTUS CT C CK EEDOM BU FR CT N 0.5 Miles VE HA ANTIGUA AVE E BARDIN RD ST
ROCK D ST AV AVE
ST RD S
T T ST
E IAM S RDIA
LVD L MONTE E
RTEZ LL TON S TON
O AV S
DE TT
EWIS 012 PALOMA PALOMA
C WI
L S E
BOS ET B AV C
D F
RNER AVEE V
OGAL DR OGAL A L A GUA
HILL DR HILL
N
HARBOR ST CRO B L
G AV
CIFI
ER AVE ER
D RN RD RN
RO DR RO D D
UCK A
1ST AVE 1ST MOF ST
O
P
RID
2N
ST
BLV BEACON
NB SKYWAY
SNUG ANT T
101
§ ¨ ¦
N SA NTRY NTRY
TOWT TOWT A ST E RANCHE L
01 PL
OV 1 C QUIL RPOR
GGE RD GEE ST HWY
AI DR
RO Y
AN DR AN R HWY 101
BLV
RL SCHILLING PESCADERO DR PESCADERO
R D
AY RD AY T AVE CAMBRI
RALD D RALD W AVE ME E CLE N
BEVE O ST
N AVE N
ARK
TITUTION CIR BOTT S
P R
DR S VERTI AB BURT
U DR T
ST
ST EDWARDS EDWARDS ST
CON S DAYTON ST L ST L
E L
ST PL SANBORN
RRI
C ISAL ME
NATIVIDAD RD NATIVIDAD ELVEE D T ST T SKIYO VE A DR AVE
KET
AL SI Y A NA
RR
RIA NG S CALAVERAS DR
WY RAMO TE MAR JOHN O SEVEL
T K ST
T R
O
N AVE MORY
CT PK S
R DR KERN ST O E
L DR W ME NUTTI VIC ST
IN RO
EN L
O DR O
V D BRUNK L
D E ARDONNA ANGE AL SAN
RHINE UR T
CH S T
UAN GRADE GRADE UAN PARRA
DR
R ST R HAR WOO
U S
HU LA ST
R
T N
D U B AL AN J AN S
OD DR OD EL MARY AR S GROVE
CHA E SE
RWO O
BROADWAY TAPADERO DR TER LN
SHE JACKSON JACKSON LN ST ST N
OK LN T M ST
O MIGUEL AVE HU ST
T N O RD
SAN J
ST CALLE C CALLE
P
S
M
N ST I A
ALY IS RBOR LN R
MAI IR AN NC
S ROMIE INHA ST
A FRO PINE ST S A
ST ARO
OUTL J R
UI W
A L
1ST ST ST AN P
L
L B
D I
DR CURT
N N
AMAR ST
RID RID T
P L
GE
IS
MP ST
BOLIVAR S BOLIVAR R SA
A
LE GAB
RAM Y RA
T 68 T
1 IR
S T L ST
MAD O ST
IT HWY
OS
CO CO CAP
LK ST LK
E ST E PO S AKE S
RI E
HWY 10 HWY L R
HWY 101 101 HWY VILLE ST
ST EIL
RE D RE KEE DR KEE WEST
N ST ST BUSH
AV G
PAD SE LAN
T 68
S
ROSSI R O P AL CHERO
TU ST
RIKE
T
R S
LARKI DR AN DR AN ON
M K
R S
SHE R
E E N ST N
IV T
E S
OR OR
PAR
CENT
CT ST VI
BRUCE AVE BRUCE ILSO
G W OLERIDG ST N IA T C I L ADOB L N S DR A PE N
L VE LI
DE KIP CLARK ST CLARK A MAR A VI OS PALM RD TINGS AVE ET CIR ARCHER AN FE DISON L S CALLE FONTES
LEM ACACIA ST ONDA RD ONDA ARK HAS MA M
BOR TCHCOCK
HI
RD
S S
VI DA
ER RD T 183 O P
FOS SAN JON RD JON SAN
3
Y 18
D R
MSTRONG MSTRONG HW AR Figure 39.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential City of Salinas of City 88 E V High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity IndexVehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created o
VE
RD
TA A
MEMORIAL CIR
ARAL
ST DINA P NA
ALYPTUS OORE
M
M M
I E ST EZ JUAR
J
EN
G EUC
NDA ST NDA CIE
HA T ST C HAVANA W CT
OE AV
ADA ST ADA ST N N
GRAN
C LASSE
AM
T APA S APA N
ANDRE
ST
ANDO FERN
T
S
N OL
ABRAH LINC RIETTA ST
CT
N MA
BALDWI
R
TA ST TA
OS
VE C
VIEW D VIEW
OSA ST OSA Y
MARIP
T
NCON S NCON A SK
OVE A
ST TE I TE ST TE R I OSEM Y SEM YO
VE
G
VE
A ST A LEN L ST L HE
D ST
E
HILL P A A
Y SC E
AVE M
OR AV
T S
AND AND HIGHL E
HOP
NDA AVE AND ST AND HIGHL IERRA
OMA VE
T
AV S
MILITAR CT LMAR
WA
VA OTO ST OTO CANTU CT CANTU MINGO S
LO AVE
E
A C
LLE SON
ORD AVE ORD D RN ST RN
UZE
PORK C A L
MAR A
A AVE
ST LUZERN
T
S
LEJO L A
O V
ON JO ST JO
VALLE BY AV
TE AVE RA ST VALLEJO
LA SLA I N AN PAB
H
DARWIN ST DARWIN VE AVE
CAN A S
M ST DARWIN
CLAR
HIL
ARWIN ST ARWIN
D L S ST ST A
ING ING WIN D R
AR DA
I H
ST
V HARDING
DING ST DING DA
ELM HAR
SS ST NTA
RES ST RES
IRA MON FLO SILER L
CRO ST A A
BUEN 0.25 Miles
SA T
M S RING A W
ST WAN
E G N I WAR MAS LN MAS
ORD PLU
ST G G N I SON ST SON WAR
AV JUD ON ST ON JUDS
E ST
SON
N ST N
JUD
XTO
TZ LU
J PL
ON ST ON V
LUXT AVE
T
C
BELLE BELLE SA I
T A E AVE S L
N ST N WEL TO LO UX L
ME ST LOWELL ELL ST ELL
LOW
AS
ST
LOWELL LOWELL
ST
ETH ETH
KENN T
TH S TH NNE M E
IRCL K
ST H ET N VE C
E KEN
SONOMA
PLU
A ST A
E BUEN E CH
NO
T LL A AV GUNA S GUNA A L 00.51
D
T
HILTON S HILTON R
ORD ST ER
BAK
ST N I KIMBA ODW GO
T S
RGO AVE FA MONTEREY MONTEREY
UCAS ST UCAS E L SAN A ST
AVE VE VE
URT AVE A A
E
ANDA WAY AVE VE T X VE S D D AMP YA TWEE
A W R ER AV NI A MPIA TA AN VE RCO
L A A
CHO AVE Y E
IA A IA P AVE
CH CH AV E RN HA
R OL TIN
SAN
CENT
BROAD
CE ST CE
TRAIL US ERRA T ALIFO PHOE BI ALL
C TON
EN
TY TY AV
L I R
LL M LL I
RO
N
MA
STAL R D R
E
AUTO E A TH LEM RI AM
T
C AVE H
L CO
HLAND
CT
G IDDALL S
FREMONT BLVD FREMONT OR
A AVE HI LL MAL LL D
AVE AVE
A
ST
EELER H OG W
I
AVE
T M HE
Z RD Z T AMA
LA PLAYA AVE ALM
MET VE P SON ST SON
AR AFTON FIR C
AST A ST MALL
E R E T S S S A
H ER V A ST CAL
T D
NIA LA T VIRGI O
E 1
E
O P MBRA ST MBRA LHA A PORT
AV AS ST
Y AV
I AVE ELL S ELL
T
D
F D I AVE
K K N
218 O P
I
AR AVE P R
AVE
E
COURT AVE
LYMPIA AVE
T AVE
S IL LOPEZ
O T
DWOO M AVE
LES
ALE S ALE
D
ST
S HAR
EL
L TRA L RE HILL NCIS
R
MAR MAR LLIAM
ST
COSTA A
STA L L NTR
R AVE CO S D S A CHAR
ORTIZ AV
WI
FRA
ASTA ASTA ST CO
BLVD
LDE
VISTA DE VISTA GE AVE
DUNE SH
E
ST
N NTE O
ERIAL ST ERIAL MP
I ISH ST ALLST
SAND MO E
ORAN ENGL
DEL VA AV HWY 1 HWY O AN AS E
C
VE
LN
A
E ST R ANNON AV
H
SH UC AVE
R S GLI
VIRGIN ST B
EN BRANNE VE
VE NA AVE A
BERT O T T
O NA A NA
R
CI RAM
O AVE O
GRAN E
T
EN I V C
A A T
TE N
S VE N
A A VI MO
DEL ONT E M V HANNON A A
ON FRE M A E DE AVE R V ALCAL A
A STAL TRAIL STAL A VIN
A WAY DEL E VE
CO VERD
AVE
CASA E
V
A
EST
IC IC AVE
ROBLES A ROBLES
V
L AY
E
R
H
DEL DEL DUNECR SP
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Charging Areas BasedVehicle IntensityPotential on Cities of Seaside and Sand City Sand and Seaside of Cities Figure 40. 89 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Potential Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Index Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
o
N ANYO C L NEWAL O ST 146 O P
L
D R NYON NYON CA
T N RYA B MARIN P T
S S T
VE S 0.25 Miles
8TH
NRA ST
T RD
MU 7TH
VOSTI A S
H H
T
T
6
LN
ARD ARD
RCH O ST
OCHES 3RD
5TH S 5TH
C
H ST H
AVE 00.51
4T LOS
PALM ST
D N
LKER DR 2 NESTLES RD
VISTA AVE VISTA A
PEPPER LN T
W ST 1ST S
ST
A A RANAD
G PL
T D S D DRI D A
M O
PINE PINE ST
AZA A L
LAN
DA STDA CORDOB ST H
R
DO DR DO
VI PRA
4T
R IA D IA ABI C DALU N
NTRA A ST
G
E ST
TER
T MIRADA ST CARRIL
MA L A GA FRONT STA CT
E
A S R
U
D ST D MP DIXI ST DIXI EDA D
C SOL RAMP RA RR STATE ST AL
TH ST R ST
TIE T S MONTEREY
WE IA D
INCA DR INCA PARR
NOR T C
S HA
ER ER C YA CIR YA MARKET ST A
M NTA LU
A
KIDD
ST S
LUERIDGE CT LUERIDGE
AIN AIN
ST
B M
ENTRADA DR ENTRADA
LARKSPUR RTH ST ST O
N
NITO E
B ST
RONT
F
GABILAN DR RD ISOLI
RD E E AN VICENT AN S MOR
RD RAMP 101 § ¨ ¦
MISSION RD
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential City of Soledad Cityof Figure 41. 90 E V High Low City Boundary City Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 1 & Level 2 Proposed Boundaries County Legend Highways PEV Stations PEV Data Sources: Sources: Data Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Index Activity Vehicle Existing/Proposed Date: June 2013 Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Adelaars,Intern Created Jason By: o 5 § ¨ ¦ 198 O P 5Miles 01020 25 O P 101 § ¨ ¦ 156 O P 101 § ¨ ¦ 68 156 O P O P 1 O P Figure 42.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Intensity Activity on Vehicle Based Areas Charging Potential San Benito County Benito San 91 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Vehicle Index Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created o
E RD
RE
NNA VAL R
T
A
A
NE
LO
SANT
D EW R EW VI R FAI
Y DR Y LIDA L HO
VERLY DR VERLY BE
SET DR
D
SUN
EST R
LCR
HLAND DR HLAND G HI
HIL
ARAIS EL CAMINO P CAMINO EL
R
E D E
ERC CLEARVIEW DR CLEARVIEW NEZ P NEZ
0.25 Miles
DR TORO TORO L E
W RD W Y VIE Y VALLE
00.51 MEMORIAL DR MEMORIAL
AVE
DR
RNE MA
N
DR O O SE PA
OPE RD
L
OVICH DR OVICH R OE BO OE J
VERDU D
IAN ST
R NA R D GIBBS GIBBS SUNNYS
A
RD DR
A Y MERID OCK E HILL
N DR K 25 ANT
S
O P
ECHT ST ECHT
ELTO S R
RD
OUTHSIDE SH T AVE S ST Y
A PROSPEC
MC CLO D
R T LL LL
PPE
A H
C
N MCCRARY LL RD LL
RD PE
T
S CHAP S
ANCHO DR ANCHO Y ST R S A
LANA W ELL CR
MC PARK S FALLON RD FALLON PLE
PP
E
AGE RD AGE
ST ST PRUNE
FRONT MA
FILIPE RD FILIPE ST
S ALLY ALLY N S N SAN
Y ST Y SALL
A ST A N CHA NEG N ST CIE
KIN
R
D 25 O P ST BENITO SAN
HAW
HAYDO
T Y S Y AIRWAY MONTERE
D
7TH ST
6TH ST ST T WEST S ST N R WE
T
N
AVE
Y
L
ST LL WE F PO ST TH S
U 5
D
T EGE S EGE LOC COLL
D
RAL AVE
R
A
T
NASH R
S
UTH ST
CENT A
INE ST INE L NE ST NE O LI VIST
A S
N
E
LN
U BLVD WESTSIDE
B
R CE D CE I FEL OT
C
I
AN AVE
J
IGHT RD
VE APR
DR R UMME R S
W
AL A
T RD
R R LIVE OAK D OAK LIVE
ENT
C
NA VIS
UE
B
RANCHITO DR 4TH ST 4TH
D
R
AF
GR
6
HWY 15
OLD 156 O P
N RD IO
UN
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential CityHollister of Figure 43. 92 E V High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Potential Areas Infrastructure Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Index Activity Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Created By: JasonAdelaars, Intern o 0.125 Miles San Juan Hollister Juan San 0 0.25 0.5
The Alameda
3rd
1st
i
Juan Monterey
Old San
Muckelem
1st
uan San J
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential CitySan of BautistaJuan Figure 44. 93 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 1 & Level Level Proposed City Boundary City Boundaries County Legend Highways PEV Stations Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Existing/Proposed Date: JuneDate: 2013 Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name: Project Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created o 101 § ¨ ¦ Miles 101 § ¨ ¦ 129 O P 1 O P 5 17 O P 01020 9 O P 1 O P
Potential Potential Areas Charging Activity Based Intensity on Vehicle Santa Cruz County Cruz Santa Figure 45. 94 E V High Low City Boundary City Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Potential Charging Charging Potential Infrastructure Areas Legend PEV Stations Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG
Vehicle Activity Vehicle Index Existing/Proposed
Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
COATES DR COATES
A DR A
N o
R ST
EN S DR S
VE
VI HAA STA A STA MAR VI MAR DR
CEDA S A
DR
EACLIFF DR S
S S E
ESTATES DR T ESTA LAS OL
ER RD T E
RIM
PE 1 O P
OR DR
EG
RIVEWAY D
MCGR E
V
HERTON DR HERTON LEGE DR
AT A
L
INGTON DR INGTON
RL O A C RK
PA RD
L L I MERR
OK LN OK
O LLO
LOWBR
WIL
DR BRI LENN MCG
CA
0.25 Miles
C LN C
LEY
AL LN SUBE VICTORY
R
CLIFFWOOD DR
E
V A
00.51 EY
BALBOA AVE BALBOA
MONTER
US DR US
N B NISON L NISON KENNEDY D
CUN LO ST ABRIL Y ST
COLUM C E
AVE ESL D
RDIN WAY RDIN W HA
HI
L DR L
C
BAL Y AVE Y
OR
DR AY DR AY
RW
I
ST
FA K AVE K VE
HARD HARD
ORC
A ONTERE
M AR
A DR A
P
SALTO SALTO ICK ICK
M
EL
E V
A R
DALE
ROSE
E
V
A
O
LE AVE DA
E SCALON CLIFF
ROS
E MCC
ST
T
E ST S E
V
LA AVE LA
E ST E TO
I UM CAP
DEL MONTE A MONTE DEL
TT PIN E
PL AVE ME
HILL
BURLINGA
T
TER S TER CEN
LAFAY
Y N AL N
U
S RVIEW AVE
MAIN ST MAIN N T
OAK DR OAK S AIN AIN
M AVE RIVE
AY
E
GILROY DR GILROY
B V
A
LN F DR F
F
LINCO
ST CLI
H AVE H
WHARF RD 49T
R ST R E ORT P
AVE TH TH 8 4 PAL ST
O VE A ISS ENB DAUB
E
47TH AV 47TH AZ
P
VE TH A TH 46
TO
VE A 5TH 5TH 4
R
OBE RTSON
R D
DR
A VE
H A H
44T R DR
ST A
RES ST
AVE D AVE D
CE ST 43R
ST
A
AVE NOV OL
42ND
N N L T LE D LE I
C
C
TER BA
GRA
ADE POR IR
J
C
OURT DR OURT TROT C
ITOLA RD AVE 41ST 41ST
ST DR ST
40TH AVE 40TH
CAP
VEWAY I R D ON
CT
T
D L
CORY
E
E 38TH AV 38TH RAL
M
S R
O
S EAST CLIFF CLIFF EAST
FL
O
AVE H
S WAY 37T
DEANES LN AVE BULB BULB DEO GULCH RD GULCH DEO
RO S S GR
AVI DR H AVE H 36T
AVE TH TH 5 3
R AVE 35TH
E
CLIFF CLIFF ON AV ON PS M
THO AND DR
L E
TMAN DR TMAN
O
R L
AVE
34TH
ER D ER U D
OV D
MATTISON LN MATTISON
AVE RO 3RD ST 3
E
ND AVE ND 32
AVE H
V 30T MALIB E OWE AV 30TH
H R
VE
E A E
KL EL A VE IN ANCHORAGE A ANCHORAGE
W D
L
E AV
S
DE
A LIS
OQU PA AVE L L E S LN MACI
SOQUE R ST R
R
D
L ER RD BAKE N
E
R L R
IE V RBE
U
BY A
1 ST
MATTISON E TH T V R ST
T A T R O P
UR R S TH D
REINEL
26
E REN ST
M V
A
LT IFF
LEER AVE LEER
C L
4TH
ION DR ION
UEZ ST 2
E FE CHANTI MISS WAR AV
G E C
AN
AVE
H T 7
1 HARPE
COR
AVE
BROMME R LEY ST
H
CO
E
S T
5 TH AV TH
2 17 IN RODRI
Figure 46. K
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential CityCapitola of 95 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG
Vehicle Activity Vehicle Index
Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
TH AV TH X I
R S THIRTY
D R
LCH U G
O O
ODE R
SS RD SS
FIFTH AV FIFTH
HIRTY T RO
ON AV ON G S P
DR THOM
o
R TH AV TH
OUR F D LOTMAN DR LOTMAN
DR THIRTY
OVER
D AND D
A IBU
H AV H T
R THIRTIE V A H ET I T
ROL THIR
AV MAL
N
D L ON ON
S TI WINKLE AV WINKLE L MAT
V E
PORTOL
WY
AV
V L CIE N A MA
A
T RAN
V
BENSON
R D A A
NCIN S E MO
HELE SOQU EL A
U
ER LN ER
R SNO
T
D
TERMAN AV TERMAN THURB
SIXTH
HAL Y IEL DR
S
Y Y DR
SOQ FRE
BEGONIA PL T
UR ND
L W L ER O ER ST
M
IA P M
M TWEN CHANTICLEER AV CHANTICLEER Y C
ST
E M R IVY LN
ICH EAST CLIFF HAR
EY FELT ST R
CT
BURR L
BRO H AV H V
H A H S
PAGET AV PAGET NT
R
COMME
17T ADE LN ADE
AV VENTEE
HAMIN C E I KIN
SE INN
PAUL M PAUL R ST TVIEW D TVIEW
DOMINICAN W CT
S
RR AV RR
O
T A
N LINNEA
CO AV
H H
EILA CT EILA
L L
IET
R LICE ST
V
A
H
A WENT EAU D EAU T T
T ILL S
EEN
PLA T
WEBSTE INET
TH AV TH
RR N
S TEEN
AV JOSE JOSE
TWICK H
EIG
RADO AV RADO
S O ME O D EL
GHTS
I B
ECT CT IGUEZ AV
NTH
DR HE CAPITOLA RD V
A
AV
N TEE NTH AV NTH
K K
X
AK WY AK E
ODR
V
CT SI
TE
ENTH
O A
F R OA LIVE I
E H F
PROSP Z LN T 0.25 Miles
OOD N P
S EDDY LN OURTE
W F
VOL
HIRTEE
BRIA LN AV
RO TAYLOR L T DA AV AV TH P LA FON
1
ROOK CAM SEVEN
O P TWELFTH
B
Y Y 00.51
H AV H
RK W Y NINT RL AV T PA W PARK T PARK W O LN
CA UTH AGG LN
A AV A ELL
BI SO
AV ST
ISSEY BL M
V N A H H
T SIX SUBUR ST AV
R E
RTON S
V EVETHA FORR EATON S
R A T
LN
MANN AV LAGO
AG MOR
V AGE LLE H MARNELL A
N DR
A
A HARBOR
K ST
AN JU AN RIC
S
RAMP FRED LA VE LA
OFF OFF ST PACHECO AV PACHECO T S
LK E
M M
ST OWEN ST FOU RT H
AV ER DE DE ER ST
MELROSE AV
V
ST ST L
ST
T HIRD
EY AV L
RWIN ST
T AV A UPP D
E ARRISON AV
H T INDHA ON ST
HANOVER ST HANOVER S FIRST A FIRST
ER V
W OON RN
AULT AULT
AV RRAY UMN HALL
MON LAR P S ST A PO
R GOSS A G V
A ST P
CATALPA ST RIGHT MU
B V
FAIR SEA AV HILVERT T BROOK MAGNOLIA S ST AM
AV
C O A
RT ST LINTON
D DR JAMES N ST
REDWOO DH
CIFO C
BRANCIF O R TE TE D R N AYUGA A A C F DR
IN G
OSS AV NFORD IDAH EAST CLIF A
TH BR TH W ST G T
LO
ISBEL DR NOR ST WINDSOR
INDEN S INDEN E ST L T IA HERMOSA PIN IA S V V NCIFORT A OYLE ST ALEDON BRA ST
T AV C ST D
Y WY Y SOUTH OCEAN VIEWJE AVSSIE T ST T
R S R THIRD
BOOKSIDE Y T
T
S ST ST
HUGUS
S N
AIL
ST E
MARKE ALLE WATE ST
OCEAN R T
T UHD OUTH EE BERKELE EMELINE S L
17 DELL
ST
ST Y AV ST
N PLYM O P
MA AY N T
O BEACH ST BEACH W
ST
CLE DR AY AV BIKE
AN M
WE SON CIR AD
ST
O F
GR REL IF
BARS A ST A R L Y KOTA ST KOTA A
D C W SOUTH OUL U
B R
M E ST A
C T HUBBARD UNG S L
E E YO AIN
T M
N ER ST V ST
S S RI ONT ST
COLO
AI FR DR V D T
LINS A S
BL IR
HOL E ST YCE
C AV H
IFI T TON
SID PR T PAC
L G
T RAIL
FELKER FELKER IL CEDAR S T BIKE H T T
ILL RD ST R S
GRAHAM H AV CENTE
ST LTON AV LTON
H WASHIN
T ST T HINE S HINE
E
C
UT UT
T EXT P
US
MAT N T ST ER ST ER STREE RIV
A TNU ST
OC ST ST NION ST NION HES
OCEAN JOSEP C E T LAGUNA
SCHOOL S S
T L
CHUR
WAL N
U MYRTL R
S BU RTY ST RTY K E B I C L
ST BLA
ORA ST ORA RKEY
N ST N E
M FELIX ST
L ST L
T ST CENTENNIAL
RA
O
NO FERN C
WALTI ST GHA ST
YLOR YLOR NAL R N ST
A NE NATIO
BL ST RD
O ST T
J W BIA IA S TA LUM
T CO
VE COLUMB
ST
IGH AL
V
TO INENT
ST CONT
ST ST A H I
PIONEER ST ORN IRBY ST CALIF
AL K WES N AV A A TA I RIGG
N ST AL
VEY O ST S ST FORNI
R I AV
PAYT Y L DROW
B D ENC TI T WOO
ALLEY CA O S CI ES
S ST S HAR ON
CLU BOI AV Y K LF DU BA O ST CI
G Y
R WIL NG ST NG I LK TRESC U
K PALM ST ST WALNUT WA
AURENT ST LOVE AVN I W RD
HIGHLAND AV HIGHLAND R L
D AV TA
DUFO AV EAU ALLEY
A A NK SIDE AV
EA T
N T UNG S
AL
ENT ST ENT O XFO
DOW RD RA AV
ALO LAUR
Y ALMAR R
D G ST O
A
IN IN S PLA R
R ESC
E SPR D IRE AV
E E VE ST
F D F
R M
KALKAR ST TH R
SH F E
TU OLI K
ST N BALDW N
AS AV
IR CLI
P JORS T FA T
MA E S KE BER MIRAMAR D N ST N GETCHELL S
MOOR DR ST
ST H EST
DR O JOHN ST
ARCHER ALLEY
T CT S
W K K
E DR R ST
G AR STA N C SWIFT
COOLID G L E
VI D AV A HEA
H BAY ST A MERCE MA
L AV E
DIFF P AYONA DR MES
B
CAR ALTA PH C
N ALLEY
M
W ST W
DR L OPE
ED H ETON WY ETON
BAY DR S AWAR ST
VIE NTO AV AM HAGAR SACRAME
DEL N AV
ILLAN DR ILLAN AUBUR
MC M MC
UNN DR EL DR NOBEL
NOB
GRAND MISSION MISSION
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential City of Santa of City Cruz Figure 47. 96 E V High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Potential Infrastructure Areas Level 1 Only Level 2 Only Level 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Vehicle Index
Date: June 2013 June Date: Project Name:Electric Vehicle InfrastructurePlan By: JasonCreated Adelaars, Intern
IS RD WY R
RV PEA ST
JA O
LN L LN
E HILL RD RD EY o
VIN WER VALL
LO Y
GULCH RD HAPP
CREEK YSTAL WILD F TIE CR
LM LN R
PA D UPITER TE UPITER
J
LONE TE
FOR CI
BRAN
ENT CT ENT C
RES
C
R
D
ENT DIRT ACCESS
WY
CI FNEY ESC
GAF R
D
R
BLOSSOM WY R IGHGATE RD IGHGATE C H
HIGH GATE HIGH
ELO DR ELO I SAWYE C
BETHANY DR
DR
WY
LESTE CE CI E DG
TABOR DR EN RD
R TE RI TE I K
N
SUNSET TE SUNSET
O DR VARRA TE CREE L GRA LAU GRANI
NA R
OO D H E D L CAMIN
SC E L DR AIR
D DR 0.25 Miles
L NS FIEL BEL IO
L
DR RD
NE HI DR SOUTHWOO
ANTA'S VILLAG ANTA'S
VI UB
S
CL VARRA DR VARRA
RANCH RANCH
EN DR EN
O NA O
SHERMAN 00.51
DR D D S
O
MEADOW WY MEADOW
GLENWO TS
HIDD H BLAIR G LN Y EK HEI DR M
A W SPA S
AYA NDA
DR CA SQ ICTOR
DR V NIS WY NIS
CIE OD
A J
SAN HA
E WY E
D
REDWO
R GRAC
WY
RD GRACE
DELL WY Y PUEBLO EL W DR 17
E O P WY DISC
WILLIS
RD LN S OD
LE D
DUNSLE R
DR LLS
NKER' CATHY L
N HI N A MAC L R
T
REE BA G
TER D N RD
MORGANS RUN MORGANS LN A ON NY
ERB N CA
R N
KERS RD KERS VIC CE
D I GLE
AN T
C DR LLEY T
S ZANNE L VA U N
S L
TTS TTS DR
LN
CIA R
A A
DRONA D DRONA
MA
R
RIDGECRE
LU T LA
SCO
OAK
D
I CT I VIK RD
CREEK
UES EAN EAN
B NO DR
S
A C A
E LUNDY LN L LUPINE
LN IEW DR PIN EL SERE
IEW ING ING RD ON RD I V
LAKEV V
WAY
PK
HERM ISPER
AN AN ON RD ON H ALLEY ALLEY
OOD DR OOD S
V
MT W NEL
R
D
R
EN EN
ARABI
ONTIER ONTIER BLUE BONNET
FR
SHASTA
R
A D A LVERW N E L
E
GRE
SI
ZALEA T ZALEA
A
DR E
DR
D DR RNACL
E A TAB
NGE NGE L
T RA T LOCKHART GULCH R GULCH LOCKHART TREL
COAS MON DR ES
GEYERR R E R T H L D M O DR A S LOCKE WY AJ
B GLEN D DR ES
DER R EN
RY D PIN N
R DD TWI I H
MON
R DR PINECONE E LN LOCKEWOOD H
MT
WORTH LN WORTH
R
D
FOX CT FOX E E
RD
CONFERENC ILL
GRAHAM H Figure 48.
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential CityScotts of Valley 97 Appendix A. Map Book of Monterey Bay Area Jurisdic on Poten al EV Charging Areas High Low City Boundary City Potential Charging Potential Areas Infrastructure Level 1 Only Level 2 Only 2 Level 1 & Level Proposed Legend PEV Stations PEV Existing/Proposed Data Sources: Maps; Charger EV AMBAG Vehicle Activity Activity Index Vehicle Date: June 2013 June Date: Plan Infrastructure Vehicle Electric Name:Project Intern Adelaars, Jason By: Created
N
L RD o
ROSA EW
LAKEVI CT
N JUAN RD
M M
R
E D E
P DR G SA
GRA DR CAMBRID
BAF
N E AV E I
Y
TTER
BRONT ALLISON RD
LTA W LTA
CU AV DE
WY
GE DR MOND N AL
T L T RD CONDI
LLE S R 152 O P
CO
LEWI DR AR D SUNCREST
DR LY LY DR
R
129 AVE R CED DR O P
V ST E D
NE
VE A
IENNE CI OS
LA KE N DR N
IRIS BRIDG
OD D O
T
BE
O R
VIV AV ARG L AN AV ARLE ST
TW
NT LN AI
TUTTLE A R
AD AV 0.25 Miles EN ST SUSAN
ANOR BECK
R S KENZIE
B M C
WY ST
ST A
COLEM M NUGE GOND ST
OW T
RD R AS RD
WILL N
CH LOUGHEOOLIDGE AV SALI
N Y ST J C
T S
A ITE S DR
ST E COLN ST ENTE
FORNI
I
L T
T BEA T WH C S DOLORES AV
OHA CA TER LIN 00.51
ALL
L ST
OREGON
EAS ON CHANT ST ST POR
GNER HILL AV R BISHOP ST BISHOP
HO T
A N
WASHINGT MA
W NGTON AVE AV PLE
AV
MA L
HIL ON STST BREWI FRO ST
ST T UNI
V MADISON ST N WE
MMER RD MMER ST L T MAIN
RI SON S
G BRON
ERS AV ARR S ST
ROG LINCO B K
PALM A PALM ST D ST D
FFERSONT T
PEC
T E J S S
EN
T
FOR LEY I S I
EY FIR
S
N AL L T
T UDD N ST LL LN
S AL A E
STA
DR HIGH KAT
DISON S BRENNA A
A AV S LN
Y
E
IEW LL WY M
A N
ST E S SECOND
A L R ST MARTIN
INE INE B E
STV
LN
ST K N M
OM OM ILBURN GARD
L ED K AS
A RIGUEZ ST
PI WY PI WAL
CRE
J
P S
ILES ILES ST T DR
FRE S
T
M
E VE
RIN ST RIN ROD R
H ST H
S EIGHTH CRE
SON LN SON
T HA
N X
Y Y
MA
KADDERLY L KADDERLY
HYD SI KI
NE
AT FORD ST FORD
LN
NANA LN NANA V
NTA CLARA ST
A L RD
CA
MA IA D
A SA KEAR ST
N TR STA
H I
BLA LN
V INDUS AC
LN A
RIPOS
HUR RD HUR A JUDD R
RD AV RD BE T A
C
ET ALT FUCHSIA DR FUCHSIA
O DR
M R
E AR
V TE
FF S
A CK EST I E N
HI W
R
T AV CL WINCH VIS VIS SE
N AV SYDNEY D
AV
O LN DA R RD PAJA UIN AREY E PKY
STEWARTQ AV C LON
RINGTON OH
VANIA DR ER
PENNSYL RD HAMMER
D
R
ST E
ONA AV ONA R
N
BEACH BEACH
PE D PE
ROACH MONTEBELLO DR HO
T
NY LN BYN
BLVD A AV O
R N L
A PEN PIST M IET WES
DR
A PR D
M 1
GREEN VALLEY RD VALLEY GREEN
RE DR ST IN LEE R LO O P DR MA FREEDO DR Y ERO
L EG D N CT N FIRE R
AL
HOLL SINC
KRALJ
EVA V IAM A IAM
DR WILL
EDOM B S RD BL ILL
NY H
SUN E N CT N
ERMA
RE H
F AV IR ST MELWOOD
DR
DY OAKS DY SHA ORT DR F ER AF
L RD AV LE
L
AIRP
MIL RD VER LM LM
PE HO SIL
Y W
S S TOMA N SA RMAN R
DR HE H
G CHAP
AVI ATION ATION WY
D RTH
R O R LOU HA
NGA R WY R
N S
SOUTH DR S
ST
N L
LDEZ ANNA
VA
ASAS GATE D KIN
R A
ALAB H D WEST
C
BRADFORD R BRADFORD
NWOOD PL NWOOD D R ANFRE M
LY
R
A D A
V
A
NE
R
CE IST U
L
A V A N
E FRONTAGE RD
U B
IDGEWAY ST
R LN
E RD OLD ADOB
ROUNTREE
RABING RD RABING T RANPORT RD RANPORT
Potential Charging Areas Based on Vehicle Activity Intensity Vehicle Based on Areas Charging Potential City of Watsonville City of Figure 49. 98 E V
99 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Aixam Mega Van Aixam - NICE - Mega City Aixiam-Mega group,France Mega e-city American Electric, USA Kurrent Aptera 2e Aptera, USA Aptera 2e ATT R&D Parade Audi A1 e-tron The A1 e-Tron is an OEM PHEV conversion of the 5 door, 4 passenger Audi A1. The A1 e-tron has an all-electric range of 31-62 mi (normal vs effi ciency mode)... Audi e-tron The e-tron is a 2 door, 2 passenger all electric sports car based on the R8. The e-tron’s 42.4kW ba ery pack give it a range of 248 km. The eTron is powered by 4 hub motors. 1,000 car run with target intro 2012 BAIC C60 Audi e-tron Spyder The latest vehicle in Audi’s e-tron family, the Spyder, is a two-door, two- seat sports coupe powered by a 221kW (300-hp) twin-turbo V6 TDI and two electric motors with a combined output of 64kW... BAIC BE701 The BE701 is a 4-door sedan, fully self-developed EV by Beijing Automo ve Industry Holding Corpora on (BAIC) under subsidiary Beijing New Energy Automo ve... BAIC C60 A 4-door sedan available in China Blade Electric Vehicles, Blade Electron Australia BMW Ac veE The Ac veE is BMW’s next vehicle in their Effi cientDynamics lineup. It is an all electric BMW 1-series coupe powered by a 125kW electric motor (170hp) with 250Nm of torque... BMW i3 The i3 will be BMW’s fi rst produc on electric vehicle. It is a 3-door hatchback that is expected to be under 2,500 lbs, thanks to it’s carbon fi ber body and aluminum chassis... BMW i8 The i8 is a newly-designed 2-door 4 seater PHEV, with the same electric drive system as the BMW i3 powering the front wheels, and a 1.5 L, 3-cylinder engine driving the rear wheels... BMW MINI E The MINI E is an OEM conversion of MINI 2-door hardtop to a 2-seat EV with AC150 drivetrain & ba ery from AC Propulsion. The MINI E has a 100mi range and... BMW MegaCity 2-door coupe
100 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) TBA 40 40 Now Available 37 40 4KW Now Available 37 40 Now Available 40 35 TBA Now Available 100 90 TBA 2011 PHEV 31 80
2012 EV 154 124 42.4 230
TBA PHEV 31 155
TBA EV 120 100
2011 EV TBA 62 68 40
2011 EV 100 90 125
2013 EV 100 TBA
TBA PHEV 20 155
Now Available EV 100 95
2013 EV 100 95 35 112
101 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
BYD Auto e6 The e6 is an all electric 5 passenger, 4 door crossover with a 330 km (205 mi) range and top speed of 100 mph. The e6 can accelerate from 0-60mph in 8 sec and can... BYD Auto F3DM The F3DM is BYD’s fi rst plug in hybrid with a 60 mi all electric range and 250 mi total range. The F3DM is powered by a 1L engine and two permanent magnet motors... Chery Automobile Co. S18 Alterna vely referred to as M1, the S18 by Chery is, 4-door, 5-seater compact with a 150km (93 mi) range and top speed of 120 kmh (75mph). The S18 is powered by a 336V 40kWh... Chevrolet Volt GM’s EREV, extended range electric vehicle, with a 16kWh Li-ion ba ery from LG Chem, giving the Volt a 35 mi all electric range and 379 mi total range. Citroen C1 Citroen C-Zero 4-door compact Citroën C-ZERO Rebadged Mitsubishi i-MiEV. 4-door hatchback, range 130 km “standard combined cycle”, top speed 130 kph, 0-100 km/h 15 sec, 60- 90 km/h 6 sec, 330V 16 kWh Li-ion ba ery... Citroën Revolte The Citroen Revolte is a compact 3-seater city car, said to be inspired by the famous 2CV. It will be powered by Li-ion ba eries, an electric motor, and a small gas engine... Coda Automo ve CODA Sedan The CODA is a 4-door, 5-passenger sedan. Range is 90-120 miles, top speed is 80mph... Commuter Cars Tango T600 A unique 2 passenger car with inline sea ng and a range of 40-200 mi, depending on ba ery choice. The T600 will accelerate from 0-60 in just 4 sec... Detroit Electric e63 Based on the Proton Persona, the e63 has a 4-speed transmission, will accelerate from 0-62 mph in under 8 sec, and contains a 25kWh Li-ion ba ery... Dodge Circuit DOK-ING XD Smart-sized 3 seater with 30kWh of LiFePo4 ba eries, 2 or 4 40kW (53HP) brushless AC motors, depeding on confi gura on, available in front, rear, or all-wheel drive, 0-62mph in... Duracar Quicc DiVa Lightweight, small van made from recycled plas c, LiFePo ba eries, shareholder recently brought the company out of bankrupcy and are looking for more investors... Dynasty Electric Vehicle IT Sedan Limited, USA Elbil Norge Buddy
102 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) 2011 EV 205 100 48 75
2011 PHEV 60 TBA 17
Now Available EV 93 75
Now Available PHEV 35 100 16
TBA 60-70 60 TBA EV 130km 81 16 47 Now Available EV 80 80
TBA EV TBA TBA
2011 EV 100 80
Now Available EV 200 135 600
TBA EV 112 112
TBA TBA EV TBA TBA
TBA EV 90 75
Now Available EV 30 25
Now Available 60 13
103 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Electric City Motors Current Electric City Motors, USA Current Electrrum Spyder Ele rica EV Drive Puma The Puma is an all-electric sports car, manufactured in South Africa Fiat e500 Fisker hybrid Fisker Karma A 4-door, 4-passenger luxury plug-in hybrid sports car with a 50 mi all electric range and 0-60 speed of less than six seconds. The Karma has an electric drivetrain by... Fisker Surf The Fisker Surf will be the Karma’s big brother. Fisker describes the Surf as “a crossover between a sport car and a sta on wagon”. Ford C-Max Energi The 2013 Ford C-Max Energi is a plug-in hybrid version of the Ford C-Max. The C-Max Energi can drive in all electric mode over 47 mph and is expected to have a range of over 500 miles... Ford Escape PHEV Based on 5-seater Escape SUV, AER 40 mi, top speed 102 mph, Li- ion 10kWh ba ery pack, 6-8 hr recharge me on standard 120V/15A outlet, 120 mpg... Ford Focus Electric The Focus Electric is based on Ford’s next genera on Focus body. The vehicle is powered by 23 kWh of Li-ion ba eries with ac ve liquid cooling. Ford Transit Connect GEM e2 GEM e4 GEM e6 GEM eL GEM eL XD GEM eS GEM Peapod GEM, USA GEM e2 GEM, USA GEM e4 GEM, USA GEM e6 Gine a G50 EV Two seater sports car based off of gasoline G50, rear-wheel drive, brushless 300V DC motor... Groupe Dassault Cleanova Herpa Miniaturmodelle Trabant nT Two door moderniza on of the Trabant with EV range of 250km. Per GmbH Herpa website, Ronald Gerschewski, CEO of project partner company IndiKar said...
104 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) TBA 55 75 45 TBA 55 75 TBA TBA 65 45 Now Available EV 60 75 TBA 75 60 TBA Now Available PHEV 50 125
2012 PHEV TBA TBA
2012 PHEV TBA TBA
2012 PHEV 40 102
2011 EV 112 100
Now Available 80 75 TBA 35 25 TBA 30 25 TBA 30 25 TBA 30 25 TBA 40 25 TBA 30 25 TBA 30 25 Now Available EV 35 25 Now Available EV 30 25 Now Available EV 30 25 TBA EV 250 120 300V DC motor
TBA 2012 EV 155 TBA
105 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Heuliez Mia Heuliez WILL French coach builder in collabora on with Michelin & Orange, Opel Agila body, 4 Michelin in-hub wheel motors, has 2 trunks, three ba ery op ons for range of... Honda EV-N Honda Fit EV Honda’s latest EV, the Fit EV is an all-electric OEM conversion of Honda’s 5-passenger Fit. The Fit EV has an es mated range of 100 miles and is expected to be for sale in 2012. Hyundai Blue-Will 4-door hatchback, new body design, same wheelbase as Kia Ray, LG Chem Li-ion ba ery, 100kW electric motor, con nuously variable transmission... Hyundai i10 EV EV version of Hyundai’s i10 5-door hatchback 5-seater city car, 0-60 mph 15 sec, 16 kWh LG Chem Li-ion polymer ba ery, recharge 240V less than 5 hr... Kewet Kia Pop The Kia Pop is a uniquely-designed all electric vehicle that seats 3. The Pop’s lithium polymer gel ba eries and 50-kW electric motor will take it 100 miles per charge with a top speed of 87 miles per hour. Kia Ray Uses same wheelbase as Hyundai Blue-Will, but designed to be more aerodynamic (Cd of 0.25), 1.4-liter 4-cyl engine and 78kW electric motor... Kia Venga EV EV version of Kia’s new Venga “tall wagon”, 24kW ofl ithium polymer ba eries stored under fl oorpan of vehicle, 80% recharge in 20 minutes with 50kW fast charger... Lightning Car Company GT Hand built exo c car,0-60 mph < 4 sec, 30 Altair NanoSafe™ ba eries, can recharge in 10 minutes, four in-hub 120kW wheel motors, body made from... Lumeneo SMERA Ultra narrow l ng 4-wheel vehicle with two inline seats, 0-60 mph 8 sec, 10kWh Li-ion ba ery pack, two 15kW DC electric motors power rear wheels... Luxgen EV+ 7-passenger minivan powered by 180kW (240hp) electric motor and AC Propulsion drivetrain, 0-62mph in 8.6sec, top speed of 145km/h, range: 350km... Maranello Maranello4 Maranello, Italy Maranello 4-cycle Mercedes A-Class E-Cell Daimler and Tesla have partnered to produce an all-electric A-Class. The vehicle will be manufactured at Daimler’s Rasta plant in Germany...
106 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) TBA TBA EV 249 TBA
TBA 2012 EV 100 90
2012 PHEV 38 TBA 100
2011 EV 100 80
TBA TBA EV 100 87
TBA PHEV 50 TBA
TBA EV 112 87
2012 EV 188 130
Now Available EV 90 80
2011 EV 200 90
Now Available 62 45km/h 4 Now Available 62 28 2011 EV 124 93
107 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Mercedes B-Class E-Cell PLUS Plug in hybrid version of the B-Class E-Cell with an all electric range of 62 miles using an 18 kWh ba ery pack. A 67-hp 1.0L 3-cylinder engine gives the E-Cell Plus a total range of 373 miles. Mercedes BlueZero E-Cell Electric-only version of the PHEV BlueZero E-Cell Plus, based on next genera on B-class body style, 35 kWh ba ery pack. One of three in the BlueZero Family... Mercedes S500 Vision Luxury sedan based on the popular S-class, 10kWh Li-ion ba ery, 44kW (60HP) electric motor with a 3.5L V6 petrol engine, and 73 mpg... Mercedes SLS E-Cell Sports car with 4 hub motors with a combined output of 392kW and 880Nm of torque. Daimler claims the vehicle will accelerate from 0-62mph in four seconds... Mercedes-Benz Onece-in-a- Life me Electric Car Mila EV Miles Javlon XS500 Miles Electric Vehicles, USA Miles Z40s Mindset AG Mindset Ultra-lightweight hybrid vehicle with roof-mounted solar panels, gullwing doors, designed by former VW head of design Murat Günak, AER 100-200km based on driving style... Mitsubishi ‘i’ The Mitsubishi ‘i’ is the North American model of the iMiEV electric car. The ‘i’ is powered by a 47kW AC synchronous motor and a 16-kWh Li-ion ba ery pack... Mitsubishi iMiEV Cargo The iMiEV cargo is based on the all-electric iMiEV’s body and drivetrain. The back of the vehicle has been completely redesigned from the iMiEV to achieve of 60 cubic feet of storage space. Mitsubishi PX-MiEV 4-door, 4-seater, AER over 50km in “10-15 EV cruising” mode, Li-ion ba ery pack less than 16kWh, permanent magnet electric motors front & rear, 60 kW, 200 Nm... MM NmG Mullen Motor Company L1X-75 GT MyCar Myers Motors Qui Motors Myers Motors, USA NMG NevCar Nice Mycar NICE and Fiat Micro Ve e AKA Fiat e500; joint eff ort between Fiat and NICE, 4 seater, Li-ion polymer ba eries, Chrysler will launch the vehicle in the US in 2012...
108 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) TBA PHEV 62 93 18
TBA EV 120 TBA 35
TBA PHEV 19 TBA
2012 EV 130 155
TBA
TBA 150km TBA TBA 50 25 Now Available PHEV 112 87
2012 EV 85 81
TBA EV TBA TBA
2013 PHEV 31 TBA
TBA TBA TBA 40 40 TBA TBA 30 75 TBA Now Available 40 40 2012 EV 75 60
109 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Nice, UK Nice Mycar Nissan Esfl ow The Esfl ow is a concept sportcar of Nissan’s new EV family. The Esfl ow uses technologies developed for the LEAF, with several enhancements, including two twin AC motors, one for each rear wheel of the vehicle. Nissan LEAF The Nissan LEAF was built from the ground up to be an EV. It is a 5-seater, 4-door hatchback based on Versa/Tida pla orm. The LEAF has an 80kW electric motor... Nissan NUVU Nissan Townpod The Townpod is the newest member of Nissan’s ZeroEmission family. It is an all electric vehicle, designed to be customized to meet the needs of almost any driver. Obvio! Opel Ampera The Opel/Vauxhall Ampera shares it’s pla orm and E-Flex propulsion system with the Chevy Volt. Like the Volt, it has an all electric range of 56 km, a total range of 610 km, and can travel from 0-100 km/h about 9 sec. Op mal Energy Joule An all electric car from a South African startup. The Joule will accelerate from 0-100km/h (0-62mph) in under 16 seconds. The Joule’s Li-ion ba ery pack will take 7 hours... Peugeot HX1 The Peugeot HX1 is a plug-in hybrid MPV with a very low roof, resul ng in a drag coeffi cient of only 0.28. The HX1 has four reverse-opening doors and will seat six. Peugeot iOn A rebadged Mitsubishi i-MiEV, the iOn is a 4-door hatchback, with a 130 km range (standard combined cycle) and a top speed of 130 kph... Pininfarina Nido 2-door smart car-sized, 2-seater, 0-60mph in 6.7 seconds, pla orm designed to be easily converted into a 4 seater hatchback, small truck, light van... Pininfarina EC Pininfarina-Bolloré BlueCar AKA B0, Pininfarina & Bolloré joint venture, 4-door hatchback, 5-seater, uses Li-ion ba eries & ultracapacitors, recharge 8 hr, quick charge op on available... Protoscar Lampo 2 2 seater sports car, based on GM’s Kappa pla orm, 0-62mph in about 5 seconds, powered by two electric motors off ering 408 hp, 32kWh of LiIon ba eries... Quiet Car 1 Quiet Car 2 R-Electric Car Co. Renault DeZir he Renault DeZir is an all-electric two-seat coupe that can accelerate from 0-60 in less than fi ve seconds. 24kWh of Li-Ion ba eries are ver cally mounted behind the bench seat and provide the DeZir with a 100-mile range. Renault Fluence Z.E. Family sedan, standard recharge 4-8 hr, quick charge 20 min, “Quickdrop” ba ery exchange op on, using a new body to be introduced in gasoline version in 2009, now taking reserva ons in EU... Renault Kangoo ZE The Kangoo ZE is an all-electric compact commercial van that seats two passengers. The Kangoo Z.E. has a curb weight of 1520kg and is powered by a 44kW (70hp) electric motor. Renault Twizy Renault Ze Renault ZOE
110 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) Now Available 40 40 TBA EV 150 TBA
2011 EV 73 90
TBA 125km 120km/h TBA EV TBA TBA
TBA 2012 PHEV 35 100
2014 EV 140 78
TBA PHEV 19 TBA
Now Available EV 80 80
Now Available EV 87 75
TBA 153 80 TBA EV 155 81
2011 EV 124 124
TBA 60 70kph TBA 65 50 TBA TBA EV 100 TBA
2011 EV 100 80
2011 EV 100 80 70kW electric motor, 226 Nm of torque
2011 60 47 TBA 2012 EV 100 85
111 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Renault Zoe ZE Compact coupe, standard recharge 4-8 hr, quick charge 20 min, “Quickdrop” ba ery exchange op on, 70kW electric motor... Reva G-Wiz REVA NXG Named for “NeXt Genera on”, two-seater with a targa roof, designed by Dilip Chhabria, top speed of 130 km/hr, range of 200 km, reserves a % of ba ery capacity... REVA NXR Named for “NeXt Reva”, four-seat, three-door hatchback family car suitable for urban driving. NXR Intercity top speed 104 kmph, range 160 km, Li-ion ba ery... Reva Electric Car Company, Reva G-Wiz i India Reva Electric Car Company, Reva G-Wiz Li-ion India Rinspeed UC A small two seater that uses joys ck steering, top speed at 120km/h, 0-50km/ h (31mph) in 4.1 sec, range of 105km (65mi) at 75km/h (47mph), 30kW electric motor... Rolls Royce 102EX Based off of the gasoline-powered Phantom, the 102 EX is an all-electric experimental vehicle, designed to evaluate the ultra-luxury electric vehicle market. Rolls Royce Electric Phantom Saab 9-3 ePower The ePower is an OEM conversion of the Saab 9-3 SportsCombi wagon. It is powered by 35.5kWh of LiIon ba eries and a 135kW (184hp) electric motor, that will bring the car from 0-60mph in 8.5 seconds. SABA Carbon Zero 2 door, 2 seater, conver ble roadster, 0-60 in 5 sec, 120-140 mi per charge, price not offi cially announced, will be “aff ordable”... SAIC Roewe 750 4-door sedan, top speed 150 kmph, range 200 km, Li-ion ba ery, recharge 6-8 hr from Shanghai Automo ve Industry Corpora on... Scion eBox SEAT IBE SEAT has redesigned the IBE from the original version that debuted at the 2010 Geneva Auto Show. The new IBE is a two-door four-seater sports coupe with 102 horsepower. Smart ED An OEM conversion of the Smart Fortwo. Smart began life as Swatch car in 1998, and was fi rst converted into EV form in 2006. The Smart ED will have 16.5kWh of Li-ion ba eries... Smart EV Smith Electric Vehicles Edison Available in as chassis cab, panel van or 15 seater minibus. Uses 40kWh Li- ion Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) ba ery, 90kW induc on motor, payload up to 3960lbs Stevens Zecab Stevens ZeCar Stevens Zevan Stevens Vehicles, Wales Stevens ZEcar Subaru R1e 2-seater with Li-ion ba eries capable of 15 min quick charging to 80% SOC, displayed at the 2008 New York Auto Show, it has been in various test programs in Japan...
112 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) 2012 EV 62 TBA 70kW electric motor
Now Available 40-48 50 13 2013 EV 124 81
2012 EV 100 65
Now Available 48 51
Now Available 75 51
2011 EV 65 74
TBA EV 120 100
TBA TBA EV 125 93 35.5 135
TBA EV 120-140 TBA
2012 EV 124 93
TBA TBA EV 81 100
Now Available EV 90 70
TBA 71 70 Now Available PHEV 100 50
TBA TBA 110 56 TBA TBA 100 56 TBA EV 50 65
113 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Subaru Stella EV OEM conversion of mini-car Stella, 4-door, 9.2 kWh lithium-ion ba ery, recharge 5 hr 240V or 120V, quick-charge to 80% SOC 15 min, 47 kW motor, 125 lb- torque... Suzuki Swi PHEV Popular Swi 4-door hatchback 4-seater model, AER 20km, 2.66kWh 260V Li- ion ba ery pack, 50kW electric motor, 40kW 660cc engine, front wheel drive... Tata Motora Indica EV Tata Motors Indica Vista EV 4-seater, range 200 km, 0-60 kmph < 10 sec, polymer Li-ion ba eries, joint venture between TMETC (Tata) and Miljobil Greland... Tazzari Zero Tesla from BRABUS Tesla Motors Model S The Model S is a new ground-up 4-door, 7-seat sedan built by California EV startup Tesla Motors. It’s range will be based on ba ery op ons of 150 mi, 230 mi, and 300... Tesla Motors Roadster The Roadster is Tesla Motors’ fi rst vehicle. It is a high performance 2-seater sports car, capable of accelera ng from 0-60 mph 3.7 sec (sport version).The roadster... Tesla Motors, California Tesla Roadster The Electric Car Corpora on, Citroen C1 ev’ie UK Think A306 THINK City Two seater City car with 180km range (based on MES DEA Zebra ba ery, US model will use EnerDel LiFEPO4 ba eries). Body is ABS recycled plas c, steel... THINK Ox An all electric 5-seat, 4-door hatchback, 0-60 mph about 8.5 seconds, Li-ion ba eries, recharge to 80% SOC < 1 hr, solar panels in roof power the onboard electronics... Think Nordic AS Think, Norway Think City Toyota 2nd Gen. RAV4 EV The second genera on Toyota RAV4 EV is the result of the Toyota and Tesla Motors collabora on. Based on the popular RAV4 compact SUV and powered by a Tesla electric powertrain... Toyota FT-EV Name from “Future Toyota Electric Vehicle”, 2-seater, based on iQ body, will have it’s own body style, will get its own body style to create a stand-alone model... Toyota FT-EV II Named “Future Toyota Electric Vehicle II”, second genera on of the unreleased FT-EV 2-door micro car, range 90km (56mi), top speed 100kmph... Toyota Plug-in Prius OEM PHEV conversion based on 3rd genera on Prius using Li-ion ba eries. All electric range of around 13 miles, while below 100 km/h (62 mph)... Velozzi SOLO Crossover PHEV, genset powered by a microturbine that can run on a variety of fuels, powered by LiIon ba eries and supercapacitors, 100mpg, 0-60mph in 6sec... Venturi Volage Venturi, France Venturi Fe sh Verde Autos, Ireland Verde VC-2 Verde Autos, Ireland Verde VC-4 Verde Autos, Ireland Verde VC-6
114 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) TBA EV 50 62
TBA PHEV 12 TBA
Now Available 200km TBA EV 99 71
Now Available 88 56 TBA 2012 EV 300 120
Now Available EV 245 125 185
Now Available 220 125 Now Available 75 60
Now Available 27 Now Available EV 111 60
TBA EV 155 TBA
TBA Now Available 124 62 2012 EV 100 TBA
TBA EV 93 70
TBA EV 56 62
2012 PHEV 13 112
2012 PHEV TBA 130
TBA 62 Now Available 155 100 TBA 50 25 TBA 50 25 TBA 37 25
115 Appendix B: Electric Vehicle Matrix
Appendix B. Electric Vehicle Matrix
Make Model Descrip on
Volkswagen E-Up!
Volkswagen Golf Blue e-mo on The Golf Blue e-mo on will be an OEM conversion of the seventh-genera on Volkswagen Golf. It will be powered by a 85 kW ( 114 hp) electric motor... Volkswagen TwinDRIVE Golf type 6 using VW twinDRIVE® no transmission, 1-liter turbocharged gasoline engine, runs on electric only to 30 mph, then switches to gas engine... Volkswagen Up Blue e-mo on OEM conversion of the Volkswagen Up!, a 2-door mini car that seats 3 adults + 1 child. 130km range, 0-60 mph in 11 sec with 60 kW electric motor... Volvo C30 EV OEM conversion of two-door, four-seater C30 with 82kW motor and 24 kWh ba ery pack (22.7 kWh useable), yielding a range of 150 km (approx 94 mi)... Volvo V60 Plug-in Hybrid The V60 Plug-in Hybird is one of the fi rst ever plug-in diesel hybrids. It will have 3 drive modes: Pure, Hybrid, and Power, off ering varying effi ciencies and speeds. Volvo V70 PHEV Unspecifi ed future model, shown as a Volvo V70 PHEV concept car, AER 50 km (31 mi), Li-ion ba ery, recharge about 5 hr from 240V wall socket, diesel engine... Von Mynheer Automo ve CHICO The CHICO is a summer fun electric vehicle. It is powered by two twin AC motors, which give the CHICO 44kW of power and bring the vehicle from 0 to 60 mph in 12 seconds. The CHICO has a 2+2 sea ng confi gura on and allows the rear seats to be folded down for extra cargo space. Wheego Whip LiFe Two-passenger Smart-sized vehicle with 45kW brushless AC motor, top speed 65mph, 28kW LiFe ba ery pack, 10 hour charge me at 240VAC... XP Vehicles Zap Alias ZAP, USA ZAP Xebra ZENN Motor Company, Canada ZENN Zytek
116 E V
Ba ery Target Release Top Speed Electric Motor Drive Train Range (miles) Capacity Date (mph) Capacity (kW) (kWh) TBA 130km 60 kW electric motor, 210 Nm of torque (80-hp and 155 -lbs of torque) 2013 EV 93 85
TBA PHEV TBA TBA
2013 EV 81 TBA
2011 EV 94 81 24 82
2012 PHEV 32 TBA
2012 PHEV 31 TBA
2011 EV 100 67
Now Available EV 100 65
TBA TBA Now Available EV 25 40 Now Available 50 25 TBA
117 Bibliography
Bibliography Andrews, C. J. (2008). Energy Conversion Goes Local. Journal of the American Planning Associa on , 74 (2), 231-254.
Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments. (2010, July ). Municipal Facility loca ons shapefi le. Marina, CA: AMBAG.
Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments. (2005). Regional Travel Demand Model fi les.
Boschert, Sherry. (2006). Plug-in-Hybrids: The Cars that will recharge America. Canada: New Society Publishers.
Boyce, Bill, S. M. (2009). Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Market History and Observa ons. September 23, 2009 EV Charging Public Mee ng. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board.
California Air Resources Board. (2008). Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Sacramento: State of California .
California Energy Commission. (2010). 2010-2011 Investment Plan for the Alterna ve and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program. California Energy Commission.
California Energy Commission. (2011). 2011-2012 Investment Plan for the Alterna ve and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program.
California Plug-In Electric Vehicle Collabora ve. (2010). Taking Charge: Establishing California Leadership in the Plug-In Electric Vehicle Marketplace. Ins tute of Transporta on Studies at the University of California, Davis. Plug-in Hybrid & Electric Vehicle Research Center.
Chavis, C., Kanairo, K., Samar no, A. L., Sathaye, N., Sidhu, I., Kaminsky, P., et al. (2009, September 18). Strategies for Electric Vehicle Deployment in the San Francisco Bay Area. Center for Entrepreneurship & Technology Technical Brief . Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
Cheng, I., Desai, D., Koudigkelis, K., de Vasconcellos, P., Kaminsky, P., Sidhu, I., et al. (2008, November 21). Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Rollout Strategy. Global Venture Lab Technical Brief . Berkeley, CA: U.C. Berkeley.
County of Sonoma. (2011). Electric Vehicle Charging Sta on Program and Installa on Guidelines. General Services Department. County of Sonoma.
Cur n, R., Shrago, Y., & Mikkelsen, J. (2009). Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Ann Arbor , MI: Pacifi c Northwest Na onal Laboratory; University of Michigan Transporta on Research Ins tute.
Davis, S. C., Diegel, S. W., & Boundy, R. G. (2010). Transporta on Energy Data Book: Edi on 29. U.S. Department of Energy, Center for Transporta on Analysis Energy and Transporta on Science Division. Oak Ridge: Oak Ridge Na onal Laboratory.
ECOtality North America. (2001). Blink: Pedestal Charging System Owner’s Manual. Phoenix, AZ.
118 E V
Electric Transporta on Engineering Corpora on (eTec). (April 2010). Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Deployment Guidelines for the Oregon I-5 Metro Areas of Portland, Salem, Corvalis and Eugene. Phoenix: U.S. Department of Energy under Award Number DE-EE0002194.
Electrifi ca on Coali on. (2009). Electrifi ca on Roadmap: Revolu onizing Transporta on and Achieving Energy Security. Washington, DC: Electrifi ca on Coali on.
Electrifi ca on Coali on. (2010). Fleet Electrifi ca on Roadmap: Revolu onizing Transporta on and Archieving Energy Security.
(ETC), E. T., & Americas, E. V. (1995). Electric Vehicle Community Market Launch Manual: A Guide to Prepare Your Community for Electric Vehicles. U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Transporta on.
EV Charger News. (2009, October 21). EVChargerMaps. Retrieved July 8, 2010, from EV Charger News: h p://www. evchargermaps.com/?Address=Anaheim&Want=SPI%20LPI%20AVC%20OC&Zoom=9 infoUSA, Inc., ESRI. (2009, 5 15). ArcGIS 9.3.1 Business Analyst . Readlands , CA, USA: ESRI.
Mayor of London. (2009). An Electric Vehicle Delivery Plan for London.
Mightycomm. (2011). Green Vehicle Market Analysis. Los Gatos.
Morrow, K., Karner, D., & Francfort, J. (2008). Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Review. U.S. Department of Energy Vehicle Technologies Program - Advanced Vehicle Tes ng Ac vity.
Puget Sound Regional Council . (2010). Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Regional Sta on Si ng Analysis.
Puget Sound Regional Council; State of Washington Department of Commerce;. (2010). Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: A Guide for Local Governments in Washington State. Sea le.
PMC. (2010). Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: 2010 Monterey Bay Area Metropolitan Transporta on Plan. Associa on of Monterey Bay Area Governments. Monterey, CA: PMC.
U.S. Department of Energy, Offi ce of Energy Effi ciency and Renewable Energy. (2010). Fuel Economy Guide: Model year 2010.
U.S. Environmental Protec on Agency. (1997, April). Na onal Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory Emissions Models.
Waters, P. M. (2011). Opportuni es and Challenges for Plug-in Electric Vehicles.
119 Notes
120 E V Notes
121 January 2012
funded by:
E V