Definition of Discrete Choice Models of EV Owners Based on Different Socio-Demographic Aspects
Source abstract
Abstract
With an increasing number of electric vehicles (EVs), their owners’ involvement in the control of electric power systems and their market seems to be the only option for stable operation of future power networks. However, these people usually have little knowledge about power systems’ operation and follow just their interests. Therefore, this paper deals with the decision-making process of EV drivers at the charging station. The paper presents the stated preference survey used to collect the responses to hypothetical scenarios, where respondents chose between three alternatives, namely slow charging, fast charging, and vehicle-to-grid services. The survey also contained questions about respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics, as gender, age, etc. The decision-making prediction models for each socio-demographic characteristic were created using the acquired data. The paper presents the estimated parameters of the attributes affecting the respondents’ choices for the models that allow models’ simple implementation. Knowing these models and the customers’ composition, the operators of the charging stations or the distribution networks could better estimate EV owners’ behavior and so their expected power demand. Moreover, operators could more effectively implement incentives for their customers and affect the customers’ behavior in a way that is suitable for better operation of their power systems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure · Vehicle emissions and performance · Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology, University of Zilina, 010 26 Žilina, Slovakia
Funding
European Regional Development Fund
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. Consumer preferences for electric vehicles: A literature review10.1080/01441647.2016.1230794 ↗
2. Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and vehicle-to-grid applications: A Nordic choice experiment10.1016/j.eneco.2018.12.014 ↗
3. Income, political affiliation, urbanism and geography in stated preferences for electric vehicles (EVs) and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies in Northern Europe10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.06.006 ↗
4. Parsons, G.R. (2011). Can Vehicle-to-Grid Revenue Help Electric Vehicles on the Market?, University of Delaware. Working Paper No. 2011-21.
5. Latent demand for zero-emissions vehicles in Canada (Part 2): Insights from a stated choice experiment10.1016/j.trd.2018.10.010 ↗
6. (2021, March 18). National Plug-In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Analysis, Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/69031.pdf.
7. Real-Time Distributed Control for Smart Electric Vehicle Chargers: From a Static to a Dynamic Study10.1109/TSG.2014.2327203 ↗
8. A data-driven approach for characterising the charging demand of electric vehicles: A UK case study10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.10.151 ↗
9. Lopes, J.A.P., Soares, F., Almeida, P.R., and Moreira da Silva, M. (2009, January 13–16). Smart Charging Strategies for Electric Vehicles: Enhancing Grid Performance and Maximizing the Use of Variable Renewable Energy Resources. Proceedings of the EVS 24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium, Stavanger, Norway.
10. The Future Promise of Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) Integration: A Sociotechnical Review and Research Agenda10.1146/annurev-environ-030117-020220 ↗
11. dell’Olio, L., Ibeas, A., de Ona, J., and de Ona, R. (2018). Chapter 4—Designing a Survey for Public Transport Users. Public Transportation Quality of Service, Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-08-102080-7.00004-5 ↗
12. Modeling the charging and route choice behavior of BEV drivers10.1016/j.trc.2015.09.008 ↗
13. A data driven typology of electric vehicle user types and charging sessions10.1016/j.trc.2020.102637 ↗
14. Modeling EV charging choice considering risk attitudes and attribute non-attendance10.1016/j.trc.2019.03.007 ↗
15. Understanding user acceptance factors of electric vehicle smart charging10.1016/j.trc.2016.07.006 ↗
16. Electric vehicle charging choices: Modelling and implications for smart charging services10.1016/j.trc.2017.05.006 ↗
17. Kajanova, M., Bracinik, P., and Belány, P. (2021). Analysis of the discrete choice model representing the electric vehicle owners’ behavior in Slovakia. Electr. Eng., 1–11.10.1007/s00202-021-01255-z ↗
18. Niklas, U., Von Behren, S., Chlond, B., and Vortisch, P. (2020). Electric Factor—A Comparison of Car Usage Profiles of Electric and Conventional Vehicles by a Probabilistic Approach. World Electr. Veh. J., 11.10.3390/wevj11020036 ↗
19. (2021, March 18). The Total Number of Registered Vehicles in Slovakia. Available online: https://www.minv.sk/?celkovy-pocet-evidovanych-vozidiel-v-sr.
20. (2021, March 18). Electromobility of Slovak Republic in Numbers. Available online: https://e-mobility.sk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Elektromobilita-v-%C4%8D%C3%ADslach-Q2-2020.pdf.
21. Akaichi, F. (2021, April 19). Discrete Choice Experiments; SRUC: Edinburgh, Scotland. Available online: https://www.sruc.ac.uk/download/downloads/id/4344/choice_experiments.pdf.
22. Design and Analysis of Choice Experiments Using R: A Brief Introduction
23. Theory of Optimal Experiments (Review)10.2307/2334826 ↗
24. McFadden, D. (2021, March 18). Econometric Models of Probabilistic Choice. Available online: https://eml.berkeley.edu/~mcfadden/discrete/ch5.pdf.
25. Train, K.E. (2009). Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation, Cambridge University Press.
26. Koppelman, F., and Bhat, C. (2021, March 18). A Self Instructing Course in Mode Choice Modeling: Multinomial and Nested Logit Models. Available online: http://www.caee.utexas.edu/prof/bhat/courses/lm_draft_060131final-060630.pdf.
27. Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00167-3 ↗
28. Keeney, R.L., and Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, J. Wiley.
29. Bierlaire, M. (2016). PythonBiogeme: A Short Introduction, Transport and Mobility Laboratory, School of Architecture, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.
30. Dekking, F.M., Kraaikamo, F.M., Lopuhaa, C., and Meester, L.E. (2005). A Modern Introduction to Probability and Statistics: Understanding Why and How, Springer.10.1007/1-84628-168-7_1 ↗