introducing e-buses cities’ public transport systems...eindhoven and london. 28.09.2017 ebusplan...

1

CIVITAS Forum 2017, Torres Vedras

Introducing e-buses in cities’ public transport systems

28.09.2017

ebusplan GmbH - Aachen, Germany

28.09.2017 2ebusplan GmbH - Aachen, Germany

Your hosts for this workshop

■ Long-time experience in planning and

implementation of electric bus projects

□ Battery buses and fuel cell buses

■ Initiators of the electric bus project in

Münster (Germany)

□ Fast charging at terminal stops

□ 1. fast charging project in Europe

■ Application of and participation in the

large electric bus projects

□ SEB, ZeEUS, ELIPTIC, …

■ Founders of ebusplan

Philipp Sinhuber

Managing Director

Matthias Rogge

Managing Director

■ Customers

□ Public transport operators (PTO)

□ Public transport authorities (PTA)

□ Cities

□ Bus manufacturers

□ Consultants

■ Portfolio

□ Software-based planning of electric buses

(consultancy services)

□ Electric bus planning software

□ Workshops and seminars


ebusplan GmbH

2


Path to Electric Mobility in Public Transport…

ELECTRIFICATION

CONCEPTS

Reliable and cost-

optimized electrification

concepts including specs

FEASIBILITY STUDIES

Choice of the right concept

and of feasible bus routes

WORKSHOPS AND

SEMINARS

Kick-start into the topic

„Electric Buses“

IMPLEMENTATION

Funding opportunities,

procurement, monitoring

and optimization of

operation


Some of our customers…

STIB-MIVB

Operator of Brussels

NVG

Operator of Würzburg (Germany)

Movia

Transport authority

of Copenhagen

and eastern Denmark

Ruhrbahn

Operator of the cities Essen

and Mülheim (Germany)

West Verkehr

Operator of Heinsberg (Germany)

wupsi

Operator of Leverkusen and

Bergisch Gladbach (Germany)

DVG

Operator of Duisburg (Germany)

Stadtwerke Offenbach / OVB

Operator of Offenbach (Germany)


Other Projects and Partners

Norwood

Junction Station

London

Utrecht

Ijsselsteinlaan

Vechtsebanen

South Croydon

Bus Garage

Birmingham

Berlin

Project “Municipal E-Bus Planner“

■ Introduction

■ Electrification of public transport buses

■ Transformation of an entire fleet

■ Demonstration

■ Further project examples


Agenda

■ Introduction



■ Demonstration



Agenda

10

Transition to Electric Bus Transport

Zero Emission

Quiet

Sustainable

…has already begun!

Fuel Cell

Catenary

Depot Charging

Opportunity Charging

■ All concept utilize an electric motor for propulsion

■ Charging strategy makes the difference


Electric Bus Concepts

Sources: Sileo, Hochbahn,

wn.de, Vossloh Kiepe


General market overviewBus market

Operation modes:

d) Full electric bus network

c) Operation in a part of the

bus network

b) Operation on a (special / single)

bus line

a) Operational trials

(redundant vehicles)

Ma

turi

ty a

nd

in

teg

rati

on

in

op

era

tio

n

Trials and test projects

(e.g. FC buses in HH, Pinneberg,

tests in Bonn and Bremen)

Demo projects (e.g. ZeEUS,

Braunschweig, Berlin, …)

Final goal:

(e.g. NL)

Demonstrated in

Eindhoven and London


General market overviewBus market

■ London

□ 51 electric ADL/BYD buses

operated since 2016

■ Eindhoven

□ 43 electric VDL Citea buses

operated since 2016

Source: VDL Source: BYD

■ BYD as general contractor


London – Electric Bus Route 507/521

■ Before…



□ 46 buses

□ Confined space

□ No option to expand

■ After…

□ 46 electric buses

□ 43 charging spots

□ 2 substations

□ 11 kV 400 V

■ 5 more buses at

another bus garage




Eindhoven – PTO Hermes TransdevFast charging buses from VDL


Eindhoven – PTO Hermes TransdevRoute structure

Special structure with

central hub

Bus depot close by

Business Case „Oberhausen“Scenario description

• 2 bus lines, one 12 m bus each

– ~ 14,5 km per circulation

– Passenger capacity: 70

– Li-Ion LFP-Battery

• 200 kWh energy capacity

• 5 modules

• Charging infrastructure

– opportunity charging at terminals

– overnight charging in depot

– Utilization of existing tram infrastructure

• catenary

• substation

Business Case „Barcelona“Scenario description

• 1 line with 2 articulated buses– Ca. 24 km per circulation


– Li-Ion-LTO-Battery

• 125 kWh

• 5 Module

• Charging infrastructure– opportunity charging at terminals

– Overnight charging in depot

– Power from public- and metro-grid

Business Case „Bremen“Scenario description

• 1 bus line with 1 standard bus– Ca. 60 km per circulation


– Li-Ion LFP-Batterie

• 230 kWh available energy

– Aux. Diesel-generator: 7 l/day

• Charging infrastructure– Overnight charging in depot

– Energy taken from public grid

■ Introduction



■ Demonstration



Agenda

■ Ideal case: Minimizing operational efforts by a one-by-one replacement

of an diesel by an electric bus

□ Implementation of this strategy is limited by technical feasibility

□ Analysis and evaluation operational data (vehicle schedules) required


Operational expenses

Diesel Electric

1 : 1

□ „Opportunity Charging“

▪ High charging power („fast charge“)

▪ Infrastructure in the city

▪ Implemented in:

Münster, Cologne, Berlin, Hamburg,

Oberhausen, Braunschweig, …

London, Utrecht, …


Different Charging Concepts

forth

back

Terminal stop 1 Terminal stop 2

□ „Depot Charging“

„Overnight Charging“

▪ Large batteries

▪ Infrastructure only in bus depot

▪ Implemented in:

Aachen, Bonn, Bremen, …

London, …

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85

Daily

mile

age [

km

]

Vehicle schedule


Analysis of operational dataElectrification with depot charging buses

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85

Daily

mile

age

[km

]

Vehicle schedule


Analysis of operational dataElectrification with depot charging buses

Depot charging buses

25 %

75 %

Operational adjustments and

potentially additional buses

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85

Daily

mile

age

[km

]

Vehicle schedule


Analysis of operational dataElectrification with opportunity charging buses

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85

Daily

mile

age

[km

]

Vehicle schedule



Vehicles passing by terminal stops which are

suited for installing charging infrastructure

66 % / 34 %

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85

Daily

mile

age

[km

]

Vehicle schedule



34 % / 66 %

Vehicles with sufficient dwell

time at terminal stops

66 % / 34 %

Vehicles passing by terminal stops which are

suited for installing charging infrastructure

■ Electrification with opportunity charging requires sufficient dwell time at

terminal stops

□ Additional vehicle can increase charging time significantly


Operational expensesVehicle demand by opportunity charging

30min

30min

5min5min

30min

30min

Terminal

1

Terminal

2

5min

+10min

5min

Example:

10 min interval

7 Buses

Terminal

1Terminal

2

8 Buses

■ Vehicle demand directly influences the investment costs

□ but also…

■ Estimation of the vehicle demand is complex due to several influencing

factors

□ Technical constraints

□ Distance to the depot

□ Daily mileage of considered bus route


Operational expensesVehicle demand

Deadheading Driver working hours Space in depot

Quellen: celleheute.de, bdz.eu

Energy based vehicle scheduling


Technical and Operational Feasibility AnalysisExample: bus route 130

■ Diesel bus operation

□ 3 vehicles; total deadhead: 31,1 km Best case, minimum vehicle number

and minimum deadhead



■ Operation with Depot Charger (350 kWh) and additional fuel heater

□ 4 vehicles; total deadhead: 56,6 km additional vehicle and 2 charging

phases during the day required



■ Operation with Depot Charger (250 kWh) and additional fuel heater

□ 4 vehicles; total deadhead: 73,5 km additional vehicle and 4 charging

phases during the day required



■ Operation with Depot Charger (250 kWh) and pure-electric heating

□ 5 vehicles; total deadhead: 99 km el. heating reqiures 2 additional

vehicles and 6 charging phases during the day

■ Example: Roskilde / Kopenhagen


Electrification concept developmentExample project

202A

123

Roskilde St.

Margrethehåb

Musicon

Glostrup St.

Depot

Buses Route

distance

Yearly

mileage

4 7,5 km 0,32 Mio. km

12 23,5 km 1,14 Mio. km

Total 16 1,46 Mio. km

123

202A

■ Example: Roskilde / Kopenhagen


Electrification concept developmentExample project

202A

123

Roskilde St.

Margrethehåb

Musicon

Glostrup St.

Depot

Potential charging station

Buses Route

distance

Yearly

mileage

4 7,5 km 0,32 Mio. km

12 23,5 km 1,14 Mio. km

Total 16 1,46 Mio. km

123

202A


Electrification concept developmentOperational characteristics

Additional vehicles in peak hours

■ Some vehicles return to the

depot after the morning peak

■ Daily mileages per vehicle from

139 km to 395 km

Continuous operation

■ Vehicles return to the depot at

the end of the day

■ Daily mileages per vehicle from

207 km to 274 km

202A 123


Electrification concept developmentOperational characteristics

■ Technical feasibility of an electrification without operational adjustments

➢ Operational adjustments required to ensure technical feasibility of each

concept

Bus route Opportunity charging Depot charging

Insufficient battery

capacity

Insufficient dwell timeInsufficient battery

capacity

202A

123


Electrification concept developmentOperational adjustments

■ Energy based vehicle

scheduling under consideration

of technial constraints

- Vehicle schedule for depot charger -

blau Operation in passenger service

gelb Recharging in depot

Bus route Opportunity charging Depot charging

no additional vehicles

∑ 4 vehicles

+ 2 vehicles

∑ 6 vehicles

+2 vehicles

∑ 14 vehicles

+2 vehicles

∑ 14 vehicles

202A

123


Electrification concept developmentTCO calculation

123202A

■ Introduction



■ Demonstration



Agenda


Demonstrator

■ Read in operational data

□ Timetables, vehicle schedules,…

■ Determination of energy consumption

□ Modelling of impact of route and vehicle

properties

■ Simulation of electric bus operation

□ Feasibility, load profiles, costs (TCO) and

emission saving potential

■ Cost-optimized system design (techn. specs)

■ Energy-based vehicle scheduling


Software Electrification Planner

…Ops.

data

Interface

■ Introduction



■ Demonstration



Agenda


Technical Feasibility Analysis

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

0 50 100 150 200

Time in s

Po

wer

in k

W

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Sp

eed

in

km

/h

power demand (drive)

vehicle speed

■ Modelling of bus routes■ Read in operational data

■ Energy consumption simulation



Technical Feasibility Analysis

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

0 50 100 150 200

Time in s

Po

wer

in k

W

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Sp

eed

in

km

/h

power demand (drive)

vehicle speed

■ Modelling of bus routes■ Read in operational data

■ Energy consumption simulation


➢ Vehicle schedules (incl. charging phases),

➢ Vehicle requirement, number of chargers required,

➢ Deadhead, driver hours,

➢ Technical specifications


Technical and Operational Feasibility AnalysisExample: bus network of 200 buses

■ Vehicle requirement

for each bus route

depending on

charging concept

Anz. Fahrzeuge

A B A B A B A B

… Solobus (SN) 5 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 0

… Gelenkbus (GN) 5 5 3 4 3 - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 3 2 1 2 1 1 0 1 0

… Solobus (SN) 3 2 1 1 1 - 0 - 0

… Solobus (SN) 3 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 0

… Gelenkbus (GN) 4 4 3 4 3 - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 7 7 4 6 3 - 1 - 1

… Solobus (SN) 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

… Gelenkbus (GN) 4 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

… Solobus (SN) 2 2 1 2 1 - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 3 1 0 1 0 - 0 0 0

… Solobus (SN) 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

… Solobus (SN) 1 1 1 1 0 - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 2 1 1 1 0 - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 2 0 0 0 0 - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 2 2 1 2 1 - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 3 2 1 2 1 - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

… Gelenkbus (GN) 6 7 6 6 4 2 1 1 1

… Solobus (SN) 4 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0

… Solobus (SN) 5 4 2 4 2 - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 12 3 0 1 0 - 1 1 1

… Solobus (SN) 6 5 3 4 2 - 1 1 1

… Solobus (SN) 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0

… Gelenkbus (GN) 7 7 5 7 4 - 1 1 1

… Gelenkbus (GN) 10 5 2 4 1 - - - 1

Linie Bustyp

Absoluter Fahrzeugmehrbedarf (Szenario heute)

Diesel Referenz

Depot-Lader

Typ 1

Depot-Lader

Typ 2

Gelegeneheits-

Lader Typ 1

Gelegeneheits-

Lader Typ 2

…list to be continued…

Entire bus network

• 200 buses

• 3 bus depots

• > 30 bus lines


Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)Example: bus network of 200 buses

■ TCO compared

to current

conventional bus

operation

spez. Kosten

A B A B A B A B

… Solobus (SN) 1,20 48% 39% 51% 33% 31% 25% 35% 18%

… Gelenkbus (GN) 1,53 92% 66% 87% 67% - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 1,27 62% 43% 61% 43% 40% 25% 44% 29%

… Solobus (SN) 1,38 69% 49% 55% 45% - 29% - 34%

… Solobus (SN) 1,19 73% 50% 71% 52% 44% 29% 36% 33%

… Gelenkbus (GN) 1,42 102% 74% 95% 73% - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 1,58 96% 66% 89% 65% - 32% - 34%

… Solobus (SN) 1,13 63% 50% 60% 50% 35% 35% 41% 40%

… Gelenkbus (GN) 1,99 63% 39% 63% 42% 56% 35% 59% 39%

… Solobus (SN) 1,14 78% 53% 73% 49% - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 1,40 62% 33% 60% 37% - 29% 35% 34%

… Solobus (SN) 1,20 58% 48% 58% 53% 38% 37% 44% 40%

… Solobus (SN) 2,08 165% 165% 198% 82% - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 1,86 91% 90% 113% 58% - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 3,50 57% 53% 68% 67% - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 2,28 135% 90% 152% 101% - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 1,76 110% 69% 127% 85% - - - -

… Gelenkbus (GN) 4,95 41% 41% 54% 54% 71% 45% 82% 45%

… Gelenkbus (GN) 1,36 96% 79% 87% 68% 42% 32% 34% 34%

… Solobus (SN) 1,22 72% 49% 59% 45% 34% 23% 30% 25%

… Solobus (SN) 1,17 78% 49% 72% 50% - - - -

… Solobus (SN) 1,24 38% 24% 35% 28% - 23% 27% 21%

… Solobus (SN) 1,33 79% 52% 69% 44% - 27% 29% 29%

… Solobus (SN) 1,75 36% 24% 38% 34% 52% 35% 56% 38%

… Gelenkbus (GN) 1,53 107% 82% 102% 69% - 36% 44% 39%

… Gelenkbus (GN) 1,61 83% 60% 73% 49% - - - 29%

Linie Bustyp

Relative Mehrkosten in % (Szenario heute)

Diesel Referenz

Depot-Lader Typ 1 Depot-Lader Typ 2

Gelegeneheits-

Lader Typ 1

Gelegeneheits-

Lader Typ 2

…list to be continued…

Entire bus network

• 200 buses

• 3 bus depots

• > 30 bus lines


Concept for a Changeover for half of the FleetPhases (stepwise concept)

• 5 vehicles

• gainexperience

2020

Phase A

• 40 vehicles

• …

2022

Phase B

• 52 vehicles

• …

2024

Phase C

Investment costs for each phase

■ Electric buses will not replace conventional buses 1-by-1

■ Electric buses are not a solely technical issue Significant changes in many fields are required

□ Operation strategy: number of vehicles, deadhead and driver time

□ Workshops (vehicle maintenance)

□ Bus depot: additional space required

■ Each city (each bus network) has individual characteristics that impact the choice of the most suited electric bus concept.

■ Dedicated planning algorithms tailor the system to the local-specific requirements (route characteristics, infrastructure, timetables and current planning practice)

■ Experience from other cities available


Summary and take-aways

54

CIVITAS Forum 2017, Torres Vedras

Introducing e-buses in cities’ public transport systems

28.09.2017

ebusplan GmbH - Aachen, Germany

introducing e-buses cities’ public transport systems...eindhoven and london. 28.09.2017 ebusplan...

Documents