Papers created by EVRoaming Foundation
Taking into account the challenges of having the right amount of energy at the right moment for charging Heavy Duty Vehicles, Smart Charging is not a question, but a must. And technically Smart and bidirectional charging is possible, that is not the question. It are the circumstances for the HDV market that makes it different.
Compared to smart charging for personal vehicles we see the following differences:
- Different parties involved (e.g. depot owner vs. publicly accessible location owner)
- Different systems involved (e.g. transport management systems, route planning systems, fleet management systems, CMS, EMS, navigation systems)
- Different locations, e.g. overnight charging situations at depots and along the highways:
- Public overnight balancing of all vehicles at the site – reducing load on the grid, ensuring full charge at scheduled departure time.
- Drive time, arrival and departure time, and other limitations/requirements that are not or much less issues for personal vehicles
- In case of discharging (V2X) at depots, there can be benefits for 3rd parties e.g. depot owners, but also other HDVs that need to charge at those depots.
These challenges require agreements between parties, processes that are in place, ensuring drivers get the right information and sharing the right information between parties.
One of the main conclusions of the document is that for good Smart and bidirectional charging, currently information is missing between the vehicle and the CPO and MSP. The EVRoaming Foundation started initiative to solve this gap.
The document is meant to create and support an open discussion for Smart Charging in the Logistics HDV market. Support of accessibility of charging infrastructure is the main mission of the EVRoaming Foundation.
Download here the document: EVRF Scenarios for Smart Charging of HDVs
A normal booking process of a charging station is initiated by the (HDV) EV driver, dispatch/planner, EV/Fleet owner or the Fleet manager. In the EVRoaming Foundation HDV ecosystem they are grouped as Transport Operator (TO). They initiate a booking and in case of required modifications they are actively involved for the change of a booking. We call this static booking.
In the situation of dynamic booking, a booked charge time slot is modified automatically based on unforeseen situations. Of course always with a final approval by the CPO and TO. In principle it is even possible that via dynamic booking the reservation itself is initiated / created dynamically based on a certain situation.
An important prerequisite is that the driver’s actions while driving should be limited to very simple tasks or preferably avoided at all to avoid distraction while driving.
The following scenarios are recognized that require some kind of dynamic action:
- Earlier and late arrival/delays (independent of the reason)
- No conflict with permitted drive and/or resting time
- Conflict with drive and/or resting time
- Overbooking/High Utilization
- Charging station outage/maintenance (predicted and unpredicted)
- Charging station outage/maintenance (predicted)
- Unavailable charge stations, due to technical reasons (unpredicted)
- Sliding / Flexible Windows and Permitted Areas
- Insufficient Energy Availability
These scenarios can involve different competing parties e.g. CPOs, when needed to move from one location to another that is managed by another CPO. This will require agreements on cost and lost revenues, etc. It can also have an impact on expected usage of locations. And eventually it can also have an impact on software and protocols.
Sooner or later the described scenarios will happen. The HDV market is a cost driven market. If we are not prepared for these situations, it will have a serious impact on the usage and adoption of electric HDVs.
The document is a start for the discussions and for the further steps that are required.
Does an EV driver know and understand what he/she will pay for the charge session? Often the answer is: “No”. EV driver tariffs are complex which can be caused by many reasons: because of complex tariffs earlier in the chain or by demands in tenders. Besides that the way tariffs are dealt with by different parties in the chain and how they are exchanged is not always efficient. As a result of this complex set ups and in-efficient exchange, EV drivers often can’t access the actual (total) tariff before the start of their charging session. If we don’t act and improve now, it will only get worse in the coming years.
This document describes the situation, the issues and proposes solutions on how to deal with tariffs between CPO and MSP as well as towards EV drivers.
This document is focusing on the business processes and not directly on protocols.
However it is important that protocols support the recommendations. It is verified that at least OCPI v2.2.1 can process the recommendations.
This White Paper contains 4 parts:
- The relation between CPO and MSP and how they should deal with tariffs. This includes also a technical annex on how to deal with the recommendations from a technical perspective. (This is the current released part of the white paper)
- The relation with the EV drivers and how parties should approach them with their tariffs. This is partially a result of the situation between CPO and MSP, but contains also information about signage, and expectations from EV drivers
- What governments and other organizations should take into account concerning charging tariffs in their tenders and requests for proposals.
- Future trends and developments.
The transportation sector is moving towards electric vehicles (EVs) to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and promote sustainability. The next step is to fully integrate renewable energy sources with smart charging infrastructure in order to maximise the impact on climate goals. This white paper focuses on the Dutch government-funded Re-ESCAPE project (Resubmission Experiment Smart Charging Algorithms and Protocols for EVs) to explore advanced concepts of smart charging. The project addresses three main challenges: renewable energy variability, grid stability and congestion, and maintaining the interoperability between stakeholders acting within the EV smart charging market.
The Re-ESCAPE project aims to align charging demand with renewable energy availability by connecting EV charging to electricity prices. By implementing smart charging protocols and forecasting algorithms, the project successfully shifted charging loads from evening demand peaks to the night and early morning. As a result, peak demand was reduced and the use of renewable energy increased, thereby successfully contributing to the sustainability goals.
The findings of this study highlight the benefits and advantages of adopting smart charging solutions. However, further research is needed to fully realize the potential of these solutions. This includes expanding the number of charge points, improving prediction algorithms, and increasing the involvement of EV drivers and manufacturers.
The ID format for CPOs and MSPs is set up by eMI3, an international organization of e-mobility parties that no longer exists. It has been taken over by the EU ID Registration Repository, currently managed by the BeNeLux. In the EU, using these IDs and the format is an obligation and can be requested by national ID Registration Offices. Outside the EU the same ID format can be used, although most countries do not (yet) have ID Registration Offices. It is recommended to support the setup of these. EVRoaming Foundation can support and give information on how to do that if needed.
As the IDs are an important part of the recognition of parties in the EV chain, the format of IDs can be downloaded here:
There is growing industry support for ISO 15118 Plug and Charge (PnC) as anauthentication and authorization mechanism for EV charging sessions. Once a certificate has been generated by the Mobility Service Provider (MSP) and installed in the vehicle, it can be used to provide a simplified charging experience for users, with
improved security compared to other authentication methods.
In theory, Plug and Charge certificate provisioning can happen independently to the roaming protocol and connection method used between the Charge Point Operator (CPO) and MSP. However, in practice, there is limited support within existing roaming
protocols, which may increase the risk of vendor lock-in. The OCPI protocol is agnostic to the underlying PnC PKI service used, and therefore PKI interoperability is outside the scope of this document.
This document is intended to share the implementation approaches to support PnC as an authentication method in both current and previous OCPI versions.
How can interoperability for EV roaming best be achieved and what does an ‘ideal’ protocol look like? The Eindhoven University of Technology (TUe) explored these questions by analysing the four main protocols in Europe: the Open Clearing House Protocol (OCHP), the Open InterCharge Protocol (OICP), the eMobility Inter-Operation Protocol (eMIP), and the Open Charge Point Interface (OCPI). The results have now been published in a three-part report.
The report is based on a combination of desk research and stakeholder interviews and divided into:
- A comparative analysis of the four protocols
- Pathways to harmonization in six scenarios
- Design principles for an ‘ideal’ roaming protocol
Comparative analysis
The similarities and differences between the protocols have been analysed in detail on governance, functionalities, data exchange characteristics and supported charge point information fields. With regard to governance, the protocols have been evaluated using the six conditions of the World Trade Organization Comittee on Technical Barriers to Trade for open international standardization: transparency; openness; impartiality and consensus; effectiveness and relevance; coherence; development dimension.
The summary of similarities and differences between the roaming protocols looks like this:
Future perspectives
The study shows that there is still uncertainty about what the future will bring for interoperability: for instance whether protocol developers move to cooperation or competition, what kind of EU regulations will be put in place and what external trends in the EV market will influence the likeness of the scenarios.
Although the future is uncertain, the investigation shows that the demand for roaming (including cross-border roaming) is expected to increase, new business models and services are expected to arise, regulation is expected to play an increasingly important role in the development of public charging infrastructure and roaming, and e-mobility is expected to be integrated in new transport business models and technologies, and smart energy systems.
Ideal protocol
Based on these perspectives, the researchers conclude that there is a high need to achieve seamless (cross-border) roaming, but there is also a need for a flexible protocol that is able to incorporate new, unforeseen protocol functionalities. To accommodate both needs, they propose that an ‘ideal’ should be based on seven design principles:
- inclusion of core functionalities;
- architectural openness;
- use of options;
- scalability;
- quality control;
- open standard;
- business model agnostic.
How the four most important protocols score on these criteria can be seen in this overview:
This research was carried out as part of the evRoaming4EU project. The project had two distinct goals: maximizing interoperability of the EV charging market and maximizing adoption of a harmonized EV charging protocol.
Download the three-part report:
D6.1 Comparative analysis of standardized protocols for EV roaming
D6.2 Achieving interoperability for EV roaming-Pathways to harmonization
D6.3 Design principles for an ‘ideal’ EV roaming protocol