Pathak, C (2021) Electric vehicle infrastructure decision support system. PhD thesis, University of Washington, USA.
Abstract
Electric vehicles (EVs) need DC fast-charging stations (DCFC) for long-distance trips. DCFCs are costly investments and so charging station companies want to install them in locations where they expect high utilization. Further, government agencies are usually interested in ensuring that DCFCs are available on all roads and adequately spaced so that residents do not feel anxious about EV ownership. DCFC deployment therefore must balance the private and public objectives. This thesis presents a framework, ChargEVal, for simulating charging station deployment scenarios using agent-based modeling (ABM). The ABM utilizes behavioral models for simulating vehicle choice for the trip and charging choice during a trip. ChargEVal supports multiple users to submit multiple simulations simultaneously. ChargEVal also has a dedicated results viewer for viewing the simulation summary statistics and agent state values facilitating detailed insight and simulation comparison. Results from a few sample runs, model verification, and sensitivity analysis are shown. We also answer the question of whether it is more cost-effective to create a new charging station vs upgrading an existing station with more plugs. While the current implementation of ChargEVal is specific to the state of WA, USA; the underlying framework is generic enough to be applied to any geography at any scale.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | MacKenzie, D |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision support; ownership; government; agent-based modeling; investment; owner; simulation |
| Index terms: | electric vehicle, statistics, implementation, ownership, agent-based modelling, owner, agent, upgrading, decision support, government agency, sensitivity analysis |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, strategic management, practitioner, transportation engineering, environmental hazards, modelling and simulation, mathematical modelling, sociology, decision analysis, administrative law, economics |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Procurement, Sustainability, Risk Management, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here