Você está na página 1de 10

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, VOL. 8, NO.

1, FEBRUARY 2012

A Survey on the Electrification of Transportation in a


Smart Grid Environment
Wencong Su, Student Member, IEEE, Habiballah Rahimi-Eichi, Student Member, IEEE,
Wente Zeng, Student Member, IEEE, and Mo-Yuen Chow, Fellow, IEEE

AbstractEconomics and environmental incentives, as well as


advances in technology, are reshaping the traditional view of industrial systems. The anticipation of a large penetration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs)
into the market brings up many technical problems that are highly
related to industrial information technologies within the next ten
years. There is a need for an in-depth understanding of the electrification of transportation in the industrial environment. It is important to consolidate the practical and the conceptual knowledge
of industrial informatics in order to support the emerging electric vehicle (EV) technologies. This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the electrification of transportation in an industrial environment. In addition, it provides a comprehensive survey
of the EVs in the field of industrial informatics systems, namely:
1) charging infrastructure and PHEV/PEV batteries; 2) intelligent
energy management; 3) vehicle-to-grid; and 4) communication requirements. Moreover, this paper presents a future perspective of
industrial information technologies to accelerate the market introduction and penetration of advanced electric drive vehicles.
Index TermsBattery, charging infrastructure, communication, electric vehicle (EV), energy management, plug-in electric
vehicle (PEV), plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV), smart grid,
vehicle-to-grid (V2G).

I. INTRODUCTION
CONOMIC and environmental incentives, as well as advances in technology, are reshaping the traditional view
of industrial systems. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)
and plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) have received increasing
attention because of their low pollution emissions and high fuel
economy. In 2007, on a net basis, the U.S. imported 58% of what
it consumed [1]. Most U.S. imported oil comes from unstable regions, which is a potential threat to U.S. national security. Ultimately, PHEVs/PEVs will transfer energy demands from crude

Manuscript received May 01, 2011; revised August 01, 2011, September 07,
2011; accepted September 19, 2011. Date of publication October 18, 2011;
date of current version January 20, 2012. This work was supported in part
by the National Science Foundation under Award EEC-0812121 and Award
ECS-0823952. This work is a part of an ongoing project in collaboration of the
FREEDM Systems Center (Future Renewable Electric Energy Delivery and
Management) with Advanced Diagnosis Automation and Control Lab, North
Carolina State University and the Advanced Transportation Energy Center.
Paper no. TII-11-241.
W. Su, H. Rahimi-Eichi, and W. Zeng are with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606 USA (e-mail:
wsu2@ncsu.edu; hrahimi@ncsu.edu; wzeng3@ncsu.edu).
M.-Y. Chow is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606 USA, and also with the Changjiang
Scholars Program, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China (e-mail:
chow@ncsu.edu).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TII.2011.2172454

oil to electricity for the personal transportation sector [2]. This


shift would reduce pollution and alleviate security issues related
to oil extraction, importation, and combustion. Along with the
utilization of grid power, PHEVs/PEVs also have the potential
to transfer power to the grid to alleviate peak power demand and
provide ancillary services to the grid [3].
The U.S. government puts a lot of effort into accelerating the
introduction and penetration of advanced electric drive vehicles
into the market. The U.S. Department of Energy projects that
about 1 million PHEVs/PEVs will be on the road by 2015 and
425 000 PHEVs/PEVs will be sold in 2015 alone. At this penetration rate, PHEVs/PEVs would account for 2.5% of all new
vehicle sales in 2015 [4]. The Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI) projects that 62% of the entire U.S. vehicle fleet will
consist of PHEVs/PEVs by 2050 using a moderate penetration
scenario [5].
However, there is an in-depth need to address the potential
problems caused by the emergence of PHEVs/PEVs. For instance, energy storage (i.e., batteries) is the key enabling technology for EVs. The fuel efficiency and performance of novel
vehicles with electric propulsion capability are largely limited
by the performance of the energy storage system [6], [7]. Another emerging issue is that a large number of PHEVs/PEVs
connected to the grid simultaneously may pose a huge threat to
the quality and stability of the overall power system [8]. Due to
certain technical and economical issues, vehicle-to-grid (V2G)
is still less likely to become a reality in the short term [9]. Having
effective communications technologies will be critical to the
successful rollout of EVs [10].
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section II
discusses the-state-of-the-art PHEV/PEV charging facility and
energy storage (e.g., battery) technology. Section III investigates the impact of integrating a large number of PHEVs/PEVs
and describes the intelligent energy management system at a
public parking facility. Section IV describes the research trends
related to V2G technology. Section V presents the specific communication requirements and the challenges of mass marketing
PHEVs/PEVs. In Section VI, the authors summarize this paper.
II. CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE AND
PHEV/PEV BATTERY TECHNOLOGY
A. Charging Infrastructure
The charging infrastructure is a critical component necessary to accommodate and support the successful rollout of EVs.
A recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) report
concludes that creating a nationwide infrastructure for EVs appears to be a bigger challenge than producing affordable batteries to power the cars [11]. This section provides an overview

1551-3203/$26.00 2011 IEEE

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, VOL. 8, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2012

TABLE I
U.S. STANDARD ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING LEVEL

TABLE II
TYPICAL EV CHARGING TIME

of the charging infrastructure requirements for PHEVs/PEVs in


single-family residential, multifamily residential, and commercial situations.
According to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
[12], [13], all EVs produced by U.S. automakers must follow
SAE Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice J1772 standard.
According to [14], other applicable SAE standards include
the following.
1) SAE J2293, which establishes the requirements for EV and
the off-board electric vehicle supply equipment used to
transfer electrical energy to an EV from a utility in North
America.
2) SAE J2847, which provides requirements and specifications on the necessary communication between PHEV and
power grids.
3) SAE J2836, which supplies use cases for communications
between PHEVs and power grids.
4) SAE J2894, which provides the charging equipment operational recommendations for power quality.
Chargers and associated cords fall into three categories by
voltage and power levels, as shown in Table I. It is important
to mention that the standard charging level varies depending on
the locations (e.g., North America, Europe). For instance, the
SAE J1772-2009 connector can supply 16.8 kW (240 V, 70 A),
while the VDE-AR-E 2623-2-2 connector in Europe provides
up to 43.5 kW (400 V, 63 A, three-phase). Therefore, Table I
illustrates the U.S. standard EV charging level. Assuming a 90%
overall energy efficiency, Table II compares the typical charging
times of a variety of EVs.
Both Level 1 and 2 charging stations convert the utilitys ac
power into the dc power through the vehicles on-board charger.
At the other end of spectrum, Level 3 (formerly referred to as dc
fast charging) provides electricity from ac to dc through an offboard charger, so dc power is delivered directly to the vehicle.
Level 1 charging uses a standard 120-V single-phase outlet
for a three-prong connection, which is the most common U.S.
grounded household outlet. Typical current ratings for these
receptacles are between 15 and 20 amps. Depending on the
battery type and capacity, it can take 320 h to fully recharge
a PHEV/PEV battery. Since the standard electrical outlets are
available almost everywhere and the charging time is relatively

long, Level 1 charging is particularly suitable for overnight


charging.
Level 2 is typically described as the primary and standard
method for both private and public charging facilities, and specifies a single-phase branch circuit with typical voltage ratings
from 208 to 240 VAC. According to the SAE J1772 standard,
Level 2 charging allows for maximum current up to 80-amp
ac with a 100-amp circuit breaker. A more typical peak current would be 32 amps ac with a branch circuit breaker rated at
40 amps. This provides approximately 7.68 kW with a 240-VAC
circuit.
Level 3 charging is a higher voltage, fast-rate dc charging for
commercial and public applications and is intended to perform
in a manner similar to a commercial gasoline service station, in
that recharge is rapid [14]. Level 3 charging would significantly
reduce the charging time, enabling long distance travel. The
maximum current specified is 400 amps. The off-board charger
is serviced by a three-phase circuit at 208, 480, or 600 VAC.
The detailed charging scenarios in single attached or detached
garages, carports, multifamily dwellings, commercial fleets,
public charging stations, and curbside chargers in terms of
power consumption, estimated cost, installation requirements,
and safety issues are given in [14] and [15]. Most PHEV/PEV
charging is expected to take place in public charging facilities.
Several studies compare the charging infrastructure in detail
[16].
B. PHEV/PEV Battery Technology
Since PHEV/PEV technology is promising for automotive applications due to fuel economy and the reduction of
green-house gas emissions, and possible utility applications,
various aspects of PHEV/PEV technology such as battery
storage, and battery state monitoring are active areas of research in the automotive industry [6], [7], [17]. Accordingly,
Axsen et al. [18] provided a report to evaluate the technical
goals of the state-of-the-art battery technology in PHEV.
According to the authors, Fig. 1 presents Ragone plots of
these chemistries in order to compare different types of battery
technologies. The light gray bands present the power and energy capabilities, and tradeoffs, of leadacid, nickelcadmium,
NiMH, ZEBRA, and LiIon chemistries. This paper discussed
the development of advanced batteries for PHEV applications
in details. There are three major PHEV battery goals from three
different sources: 1) the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium
(USABC) by Pesaran et al. [19]; 2) the Sloan Automotive
Laboratory at MIT by Kromer and Heywood [20]; and 3) the
EPRI by Duvall [21]. A lot of contingencies based on many
assumptions can be found among the batterys goals.
USABC goals [19] consider five major categories: power, energy, life, safety, and cost. The PHEV-10 power capacity target
is 830 W/kg and the PHEV-40 power target is 380 W/kg. The
corresponding energy density is 100 and 14 Wh/kg. Also, the
targeted costs for the batteries are $200$300 per kWh. There
are inherent tradeoffs between these main categories: 1) higher
power density is subject to higher voltage and 2) higher voltage
reduces the longevity and safety of the battery and increases
the cost. On the other hand, increasing the energy density of
the battery will lead to a decrease in the power density. Regarding the battery technologies, two major categories of battery

SU et al.: A SURVEY ON THE ELECTRIFICATION OF TRANSPORTATION IN A SMART GRID ENVIRONMENT

III. ENERGY MANAGEMENT

Fig. 1. Battery potential and PHEV Goals (Ragone plots) [18].

TABLE III
NIMH VERSUS LI-ION BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES

chemistries are close to meeting the PEV goals: NickelMetal


Hydride (NiMH) and LithiumIon (Li-Ion).
Cao and Emadi [22] discussed the battery management systems (BMS) and electronic requirements for the PHEV battery. EPRIs goals for PHEV-20 are achievable by using current
NiMH technology, while the performance goals for the USABC
and MIT are way beyond current Li-Ion technology capabilities. Gao and Ehsani [23] compared these two types of batteries
considering all electric range and charge depletion range operations. Kim and Shin [24] designed a BMS for large-scale battery
packs. Manenti et al. [25] proposed a BMS architecture based on
cell redundancy. Table III compares some categories of NiMH
and Li-Ion battery chemistries reported in [18]. Li-Ion technologies hold the promise of much higher power and energy density
goals, because they use lightweight material, have the potential for high voltage, and are expected to have lower costs. The
NiMH battery could play a temporary role in a less demanding
design but it is probable that falling Li-Ion battery prices may
disqualify NIMH from even this role. The drawback of Li-Ion
batteries, however, is their lack of longevity and need for safety.
The stumbling block to introducing all-electric vehicles on
the road today is the fact that the batteries are not up to the task
to mimic all of the conveniences that we have come to expect
from vehicles powered by internal combustion engines. The issues with the commercially available batteries in the vehicle application include, but are not limit to 1) battery energy and power
densities need to be further improved; 2) battery life is an issue;
3) battery safety must be assured, especially during fast charging
and in hot weather; 4) battery cost needs to be significantly reduced; and 5) the power electronics technologies that interface
the battery with the grid and the motor must be further improved
to increase efficiency and reduce weight.

A large market penetration of PHEVs/PEVs imposes additional stress on the industrial systems. Large numbers of
PHEVs/PEVs have the potential to threaten the stability of the
existing system. For complex electrical networks, intensive information exchange facilitates intelligent energy management.
There are approximately 250 million cars in the U.S. By the
year 2020, if 10% of U.S. vehicles will be some form of PHEV
or PEV and each vehicle has a storage capacity of 20 KWh,
500 GWh is both a threat to todays utility and an opportunity.
If not utilized properly, it will drive up the peak demand and may
cause grid instability. If used wisely, these vehicles can become
a distributed energy storage device for the utility and, hence, can
be dispatched to lower the peak demand, delay the construction
of new power plants. A number of papers have focused on the
impact of the grid integration of PHEVs/PEVs in a smart grid
environment.
Fernandez et al. [26] evaluated the impact of different levels
of PEV penetration on the distribution networks investment and
incremental energy losses. Lopes et al. [27] studied the integration of EVs into power systems in terms of the technical operation of the grid and the electricity market. According to the
authors, the proposed framework covered two major domains:
the grid technical operation and the electricity markets environment. Several simulations were presented in order to illustrate
the potential impacts/benefits caused by the grid integration of
EVs. Shao et al. [28] analyzed the impact of electricity rates
based on time-of-use on distribution load shapes with PHEV
penetration. Qian et al. [29] modeled and analyzed the load
demand due to EV battery charging in distribution systems.
Mitra and Venayagamoorthy [30] designed and implemented a
real-time wide-area controller (WAC) to improve the stability of
the power system with PHEVs. Clement-Nyns et al. [31] evaluated the impact of charging PHEVs on a residential distribution grid. Su and Chow [32][34] evaluated the impact of the
integration of PHEVs/PEVs into power grids under a variety of
charging scenarios. Roe et al. [35] presented an investigation
into various aspects of how PHEVs could impact the electric
power system and focused on the infrastructure of the power
system. Dyke et al. [36] established a series of well-defined EV
loads that they subsequently used to analyze their electrical energy usage and storage in the context of more electrified road
transportation.
Depending on the locations of the charging facility, the control of PHEV charging can be categorized into two groups: home
charging and public charging.
Most PHEV/PEV charging is expected to take place in public
charging facilities. The aggregate load in a public charging facility needs to be managed carefully in order to avoid interruptions when several thousand PHEVs/PEVs are introduced into
the system over a short period of time (e.g., during the early
morning hours when people arrive at work). In order to maximize customer satisfaction and minimize disturbances to the
grid, a sophisticated controller will need to be designed properly to regulate multiple battery loads for a cluster of PHEVs/
PEVs. This controller must take into considerations real-world
constraints (e.g., communication and infrastructure variations
among individual vehicles). The controller must also accommodate the differences in energy capacity, as well as the number

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, VOL. 8, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2012

Fig. 2. Envisioned system structure of a large-scale PHEV/PEV enabled


charging infrastructure in a smart grid environment.

of PHEVs/PEVs in the parking deck. As the massive adoption of EVs proceeds, energy management systems at public
charging stations may allow the utility to control charging times
in order to maximize the effectiveness and utilization of existing
transformers.
Fig. 2 schematically illustrates an envisioned architecture
of a large-scale PHEV/PEV enabled charging infrastructure in
a smart grid environment. As shown in Fig. 2, the proposed
system consists of three major subsystems: 1) the traditional
power utility and local-scale renewable energy resource; 2) an
intelligent grid aggregator/operator; and 3) PHEV/PEV with
on-board BMS, battery chargers and customers. It is important
to mention that the two-way electrical energy flow and communications network are represented by the black arrow.
The following section will focus on the second subsystem,
which is embedded in the solid red block, as shown in Fig.
2. The energy management system needs to not only handle
static optimization (e.g., single-objective optimization given a
certain constraints), but will also handle multiobjective optimization (e.g., multiobjective energy scheduling: minimizing
energy usage, minimizing peak demand, minimizing charging
cost, maximizing customer preference, etc.), dynamic optimization (e.g., plug-and-play operation), and predictive optimization
(e.g., -time step ahead prediction).
A. Intelligent Energy Management
Through intelligent energy management of PHEVs/PEVs,
utilities can also reduce the need for expensive new generation,
transmission, and distribution facilities by shifting and controlling the load demand caused by EVs. To achieve intelligent
energy management at public charging facilities, a number
of objective functions can be formulated depending on user
preference. For example, the objective could be to maximize
customer benefits by following demand side management [37],
[38]. Su and Chow [8], [39] formulated the objective function
as the maximization of the average state-of-charge (SOC) for
all vehicles at the next time step. According to authors, the
proposed function aims to ensure some fairness in the SOC
distribution at each time step. This even hardness will help
to ensure that a reasonable level of battery power is attained,
even if the vehicles depart early. The authors proposed a suite
of computational intelligence-based optimization algorithms

to achieve the optimal power allocation. Galus and Andersson


[40] proposed the multiagent-based energy hub system for
PHEV integration and managed recharging behavior for a large
number of PHEVs considering dynamic prices. Clement-Nyns
et al. [31] put the objective function to minimize power losses
and voltage deviations in distribution systems. Sortomme et al.
[41] devised three objective functions, namely, minimizing
losses, maximizing load factor, and minimizing load variance.
The coordinated charging of PHEVs can minimize the impact
on distribution systems. Saber and Venayagamoorthy [42] originated a unit commitment (UC) problem to minimize both the
operational cost and the emission cost by considering certain
system constraints. Hutson et al. [43] formulated an objective
function to maximize profits for the vehicle owners while satisfying both the system and the vehicle owners constraints. Su
and Chow [44] proposed the computational intelligence-based
energy scheduling at a municipal PHEV/PEV parking deck via
multiobjective optimizations (i.e., minimizing peak demand,
minimizing charging cost, and maximizing user preference).
B. Providing Ancillary Services
The aggregated EV load can offer ancillary services such as
voltage control, frequency regulation, regulation reserve, spinning reserve, and nonspinning reserve [45]. Ancillary services
support the transmission of electric power from seller to purchaser given the obligations of the control areas and transmitting
utilities within those control areas to maintain reliable operations of the interconnected transmission system (Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission). Han et al. [46] proposed an optimal
V2G aggregator for frequency regulation services. Sortomme
and El-Sharkawi [47] recommended unidirectional regulation
algorithm for use by an aggregator. According to the authors,
regulation can be performed by an individual EV by varying
its charge rate around a set point called the preferred operating
point, which is scheduled with the system. Hajimiragha et al.
[48] suggested a new technique to analyze the electricity and
transport sectors within a single integrated framework in order
to realize an environmentally and economically sustainable integration of PHEVs into the electric grid, considering the most
relevant planning uncertainties. Guille and Gross [49] proposed
a model-predictive control framework to manage and allocate
additional control reserve capacity from PHEV fleets.
C. Supporting Renewable Energy
As EVs enable load shaping to increase the utilization of installed generation capacity, they also enable greater adoption
of intermittent energy sources by scheduling electrical loads to
coincide with periods of strong wind or sun [9]. According to
Kempton and Dhanju [50], EV will serve the majority of needs
for integrating wind energy into the power system. Markel et al.
[51] proposed a variety of fleet control methods. One of the
charging schemes, renewable-energy-signal charging, is based
on the premise that the plug-in fleet can be charged exclusively
using renewable energy, with plug-in vehicles acting as energy
sink. This paper also highlighted the limitations and opportunities for renewable energy resources to fuel EVs in the future.
Guille and Gross [49] estimated the positive effect of EV on
wind power operations.

SU et al.: A SURVEY ON THE ELECTRIFICATION OF TRANSPORTATION IN A SMART GRID ENVIRONMENT

IV. V2G TECHNOLOGY


V2G technology is a most promising opportunity in EV adoption. V2G allows the EV fleet to feed energy directly back into
the power grids. An efficient power transaction between the vehicle and the grid requires exchanging a lot of information between the vehicle, the charging station, and the utility. This information includes not only technical data such as the state of
the battery but also economic data about the price of the power
and statistical information about its availability.
A. V2G Market
Kempton and Tomic [52] formulated mathematical equations
to calculate the capacity for grid power from vehicle fleets.
The authors evaluated revenue and costs for these vehicles to
supply electricity to four electric markets (base-load power,
peak power, spinning reserves, and regulation). According to
the authors, V2G power cannot compete with the low price of
the base-load power market. Moreover, it is cost effective in the
peak power market in particular cases when the peak power is
unusually high and the energy capacity of the fleet can support
that power for 35 h. Nonetheless, the engineering rationale and
economic motivation for V2G power in spinning reserves and
the regulation market are compelling. These results are mainly
based on several case studies, particularly an investigation on
the California electric power market reported by Kempton et
al. [53]. The revenue and cost evaluation in this study is more
comprehensive and accurate than the earlier methods, using
the avoided costs by Kempton and Letendre [54] and the retail
time-of-use rates by Moura and Moura [55]. The avoided cost
of the utility is equal to its least cost generation options. All
the assessing costs and revenues in these studies are based
on the current conventions of the power market. Sovacool
and Hirsh [56] investigated the idea that the obstacles to V2G
transition are not merely technical but more related to social
and cultural values, business practices, and political interests.
These socio-technical difficulties can easily be discovered by
reviewing the history of other energy transitions, especially in
the history of renewable energy technologies [56].
B. V2G Services
Ancillary Services: Spinning reserves and frequency regulation are the best current market for V2G. In these cases, although the payment for the supplied power is not noticeable,
the vehicles are paid because of their availability to the grid
(capacity payment). Considering the fact that vehicles are in
use only for only about 4% of the day time, being paid for the
other 96% gives a considerable benefit to the owner [52]. Also,
the fast charging/discharging rate of the battery makes V2G a
promising alternative for frequency regulation of the grid [52].
A case study in Sweden and Germany by Andersson et al. [57]
shows that with only 5.5% of the vehicle fleets in Germany and
4.2% in Sweden participating in power regulation, the total demand for regulating the power is achievable. Dyke et al. [58]
evaluated the impact of increasing electrification of private road
vehicles on local loads in the U.K. Subsequently, the potential
integration of vehicle and residential via V2G technology was
investigated. In addition, Brooks [59] demonstrated V2G application for CA vehicles and estimates that the annual gross
value provided by PHEVs in a regulating power market lies

between $3038 and $5038. In [60], using data from the New
York Independent Systems Operator for the eastern region of
NY, the authors proposed a dual-use program of V2G regulation on a daily base and peak reduction on days that have a
high electricity demand. The other study by Han et al. [46] proposed an aggregator for V2G frequency regulation that makes
it more efficient. Mitra and Venayagamoorthy [30] proposed a
WAC for providing damping to three generators in a 12-bus
power system with PEVs. The authors showed the improvement on the stability of the power system with the integration
of PEVs using transient simulations and Prony analysis. Saber
and Venayagamoorthy [42] proposed particle swarm optimization (PSO)-based method to solve the UC considering both the
cost and the reduction of emissions. According to the authors,
a balanced hybrid PSO optimizes the number of V2G-enabled
vehicles in a large-scale parking lot. The authors also discussed
the real-world implementation of UC with V2G. Sortomme and
El-Sharkawi [47] proposed an algorithm for unidirectional regulation. They formulated an aggregator profit maximization algorithm with optional system load and price constraints analogous to the smart charging algorithms. Su et al. [62] achieved the
optimal energy management for PHEV/PEV enabled charging
facilities with V2G capability. According to the authors, the objective is to maximize the net revenue of all vehicles over a period of 24 h, considering energy transaction, regulation incentives, battery degradation cost, and additional operating cost.
Renewable Energy: V2G facilitates the easy integration of
renewable energy resources by scheduling the charging/discharging process to coincide with periods of strong wind
or sun. Intermittency of renewable energy resources can be
managed either by backup or by storage. In terms of V2G,
backup is provided by the fueled vehicles (fuel cell and hybrid
running motor generator), and storage is delivered by the EVs
[3]. Plug-in vehicle (PV) has a fairly predictable daily cycle,
which is a few hours ahead of the load peakPV peak power
is at solar noon and load peak is mid-to-late afternoon [3].
Therefore, a simple strategy to integrate PV into the grid is to
meet peak load by shifting it a few hours backward to the solar
peak using V2G support. Kempton et al. [3] estimated that to
support 162 GW, 1/5 of the U.S.s total electric demand with
PV, 23 million vehicles (13% of the fleet), need to be available
for V2G. For wind, intermittency is more complicated and it
has a lot of fluctuations. Kempton and Tomic [3] investigated
the required V2G capacity to support regulation, operating
reserve and base-load power with wind energy in the U.S. Lund
et al. [62] developed Danish power system with combined
heat and power. According to the authors, adding EVs and
V2G allows the integration of higher levels of wind electricity
without excess electric production and greatly reduces carbon
dioxide (CO ) emissions. Galus et al. [63] aggregated the
EV battery storage representing a V2G system for long-term
simulations. According to the authors, the regulation needs
from conventional generators are significantly minimized by
the faster regulation characteristics of the EV battery storage.
Pillai and Bak-Jensen [64] introduced a new business model
called electric recharge grid operator that creates a market for
coordinated production and consumption of renewable energy.
This model transforms EVs into distributed storage devices
using V2G distributed power generation.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, VOL. 8, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2012

C. V2G Challenges
Although V2G is a promising concept, the following two
major issues might delay its real-world implementation in the
short term: 1) a two-way communication enabled system infrastructure and 2) an unproven business model and economic justification. As discussed in Section II, EV battery technology is
not ready for a frequent switch between charging/discharging
modes. The high opportunity cost of batteries prevents V2G
from becoming a reality. Two-way power flow control is the
key enabling technologies that will make V2G come true. A
reliable two-way communication network is greatly needed to
enable V2G technology. DeForest et al. [9] discussed the unproven economic justification for the utilities and the customer.
According to the authors, it is not clear yet whether the economic incentives justify V2G from the utilitys perspective. According to the authors, there are several issues (e.g., battery technology, lack of support for smart grid technologies, and the complexity of the distribution system required) that prevent the deployment of V2G. Madawala and Thrimawithana [65] proposed
a bidirectional inductive power interface to facilitate V2G technology. Quinn et al. [66] compared the impact of the communication architecture on the V2G ancillary services in terms of the
availability, reliability, and value of vehicle-provided ancillary
services.
Due to the nature of V2G challenges for the actual commercial deployment at this stage, there are several intermediary
steps that can be achieved, before this vision comes to fruition.
The potential three stages are as follows.
Smart charging (V1G): The vehicle charging rate is controlled remotely based on grid conditions and user preferences.
The benefits include 1) time-of-use/real-time-price-based
charging to minimize the overall charging cost; 2) reduce additional load at peak times (load as spinning reserve); and 3) allow
easier grid integration of intermittent renewable resources such
as wind and solar.
Vehicle to Building (V2B): In addition to V1G, the charger
would be able to feed power back to the charging facility
to which it is plugged in. V2B brings additional benefits:
1) provide backup power; 2) ensure high-power quality for
buildings; and 3) supply power to building when grid power is
costly.
V2G: At the final stage, V2G allows for the vehicle to feed
power back directly to the grid. Such a system would require
constant bidirectional communication between the charger and
the grid. As mentioned in previous section, V2G offers: 1) gridstabilizing ancillary services (reactive power and voltage control, loss compensation, energy imbalance; 2) allow easier integration of renewable resources by ensuring high-power quality
from the resource; and 3) supply power to grid when economically viable.
V. COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENT
The communication infrastructure of smart grid has been recently investigated in [67][71]. In general, the communications
network can be categorized as wide area network, field area
network (FAN), and home area network (HAN). Depending on
the locations of the charging facilities (e.g., home and public
parking lot), the needed network architecture is related with

FAN and HAN. FAN form the communications facility for the
distribution system. The electrical sensors and smart meters on
the PHEV/PEV charging stations can monitor and exchange information with the control center through FAN. These applications can be categorized as either field-based or customer-based
with different critical requirements [72]. HAN is basically implemented on the customer domain to enable smart grid functionalities such as demand side management and advanced metering infrastructure (AMI). AMI is able to monitor the electric
energy consumption in real time and control a variety of devices
and appliances inside customer premises through two-way communication. For a customer standpoint, AMI allows customers
to access their energy consumption in real time. For a utility
perspective, AMI collects the real-time energy usage and price
information to enable smart grid applications.
A. Communication Needs
The report [10] by the U.S. Department of Energy gives an
extensive overview of smart grid benefits and communication
needs. Especially, one section of this report addresses the specific challenges and opportunities presented by electric vehicles. Recharging the PHEV/PEV batteries represents an additional large load demand to the electricity grid, but this can be
scheduled to reduce charging cost and peak demand [40]. A
reliable communication network is needed to enable the successful integration of a large number of PHEVs/PEVs. In order
to make utility customer rates or programs available specifically
for customers with PHEVs/PEVs, the utility must offer special services for these customers. These services include being
able to enroll, register, and initially set up communications between a vehicle and the utility, or an alternative energy supplier (one-time setup); repeatedly reestablish communications
for each PHEV/PEV charging session (repeat communications
and rebinding); provide PHEV/PEV charging (and other) status
information to customer information channels (e.g., web and
display devices); and correctly bill PEV customers according to
their selected rates or programs [73]. As with in-home charging,
public charging will need to match supply and demand, potentially with high speed and accuracy as opposed to in-home
charging, as vehicle owners will likely want to avoid a long
delay once the vehicle is plugged in [10]. The following section will mainly focus on the communication requirements for
public charging facilities. It is estimated that the bandwidth for
both load balancing and billing purposes will be between 9.6
and 56 kb/s [10].
B. Possible Communication Protocols
In [51], three wireless technologies as well as broadband over
power line were briefly compared in terms of interference issues, power consumption, and security merits. A variety of communication protocols can achieve reliable, two-way communication networks. Since PHEVs/PEVs can be recharged at various locations (e.g., home and office parking lot), it is critical
to maintain the compatibility of communication technologies
[10]. Unfortunately, communication technology options are unproven yet for automotive applications. There is neither a welldefined industry-wide codes nor a standard for communication

SU et al.: A SURVEY ON THE ELECTRIFICATION OF TRANSPORTATION IN A SMART GRID ENVIRONMENT

between EVs and the power grid at this stage. Based on the specific communication needs of EVs, a survey of three potential
solutions follows.
1) HomePlug: This allows for high-speed broadband communications over low-voltage power lines [74]. HomePlug network has proven to achieve a theoretical maximum data rate of
14 Mb/s [73], which is much faster than ZigBee or a cellular
network. In addition, since the power supplies to the HomePlug
devices are provided through the wall outlet itself, HomePlug
products do not require additional batteries. Also, HomePlug
is not subject to other wireless traffic. This attribute is critical
when thousands of vehicles are plugged in simultaneously.
2) ZigBee: This is a specialized protocol for small, self-programming mesh network devices based on the IEEE 802.15.4
wireless standard. ZigBee devices are designed for low power
consumption and are easy to implement. Low cost (e.g., device
cost and installation cost) can facilitate the commercial deployment of the desired communication networks at a large-scale
charging facility. ZigBees simplicity also allows for inherent
configuration. The redundancy of network devices provides
low maintenance [75]. Moreover, ZigBee can operate at the
2.4-GHz, 915-MHz, and 868-MHz radio bands [76], maintaining a relatively higher communication compatibility. There
are a large number of communication nodes per network at a
large-scale parking deck. ZigBees use of the IEEE 802.15.4
physical layer (PHY) of the open systems interconnection
model and the link layer device (MAC) allows the network
to handle any number of devices [75]. In addition, ZigBees
data rate at 2.4 GHz can reach around 250 kb/s, which satisfies
the estimated bandwidth requirements for EV applications. In
general, vehicle owners would like to avoid long delays once
vehicles are plugged in. ZigBee devices can quickly attach, exchange information, detach, and then go to deep sleep [77]. The
typical distance between vehicle and charging station is less
than the radio range of ZigBee (i.e., 10100 m). Kulshrestha et
al. [78] proposed the communication architecture with ZigBee
at a large-scale municipal parking deck, followed by an experimental testbed to demonstrate the communication between
the central controller, PHEV/PEV chargers, and vehicles. Su
et al. [79] further developed a digital testbed that allows us to
demonstrate the communications capabilities for a PHEV/PEV
enabled charging facility. According to the authors, the future
work is to explore a variety of possible communication protocols (e.g., ZigBee, bluetooth, HomePlug, Z-Wave, and cellular
network) and to further analyze and evaluate the packet delay,
throughput, and received signal strength.
3) Cellular Network: This is a widely available long-range
wireless data network, making it a good option for highly mobile devices such as PHEVs/PEVs [51]. A cellular network requires more power consumption to enable a long-range radio.
However, since the networking devices can be powered by an
on-board vehicle battery, such power consumption is fairly acceptable. Both the global system for mobile communications
(GSM) and the code division multiple access network handle individual user data rates above 100 kb/s [80], which also satisfies
the estimated bandwidth requirements for the EV application.
Communication technology will also be useful for billing purposes at public parking locations. For the most part, commercial

wireless providers have good penetration in transit corridors and


offer more than sufficient capabilities to communicate billing
information [10]. Commercial cellular services may be a viable
option for billing purposes at public charging facilities.
C. Security Issues
In addition to certain bandwidth, reliability, and power consumption requirements, security issues also need to be considered when different wireless communication technologies are
applied [81]. For example, the wireless billing security is viewed
as a major concern for the users. Moreover, the actual vehicles
location needs to be kept confidential for user privacy. Another
security issue is the unauthorized transaction by a third party or
a hacker. Thus, network security is of critical importance in the
communication network at public charging facilities for PHEVs
[82]. Morante et al. [83] proposed a pervasive grid approach to
define an infrastructure for data acquisition in electric grid. Recently, quite a few papers have investigated the problem of security issues in communication networks of charging infrastructure from different perspectives.
Vulnerabilities Analysis: Traditional power grid communications have relied predominantly on wired communication to provide reliable and predictable monitoring and control. However,
the data transmission in wireless networks is inherently public,
which presents a unique security threat at the PHY layer [51]. A
lot of work has been done recently to identify the threats and vulnerabilities of wireless technologies and to summarize their security performance [84]. Alcaraz and Lopez [85] reviewed several wireless communication standards and analyzed their security. They identified a set of threats and potential attacks in their
routing protocols and provided recommendations and countermeasures to help the industry protect its infrastructure. Lu et al.
[86] categorized the goals of potential attacks against the smart
grid communication networks into three types: network availability, data integrity, and information privacy. They then qualitatively analyzed the impact and feasibility of the three types of
attacks.
Prevention: Cryptography is the main scheme of preventing
malicious attacks in the communication network. HomePlug
and Zigbee use 128-bit advanced encryption standard (AES)
encryption to secure data transmitted across the physical network. AES encryption is a 128-bit fixed-length block cipher,
standardized in 2002 by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology [87]. Improvement for HomePlug security has been
proposed in [88]. Cellular is more likely to be at particular risk.
The current security protocol used in 3-G networks is KASUMI,
which is an A5/3 block cipher. Alternative proposals for more
secure cellular data encoding schemes have been proposed in the
GSM network, such as the Rijndael-based Algorithm, which is
similar to AES [89].
Detection: The charging facilities must have the ability to
detect the attempt of an intruder to gain unauthorized access to
communication network in order to avoid unauthorized transactions. In general, the intrusion detection for smart grid communications falls mainly into the cyber security field of SCADA
and power systems and has been well studied in the literature
[90], [91].

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, VOL. 8, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2012

Client Privacy: In the PHEV charging scenarios, the vehicles usually contribute data, such as location, identity, usage patterns; payment information; and the charging station to process
this data. Therefore, the main privacy concern is in the handling of clients personal information [92]. For example, the EV
charging reveals the PHEVs location and distance traveled.
VI. CONCLUSION
PHEVs/PEVs hold a lot of promise in terms of higher energy efficiency, lower carbon emissions, energy independency,
and environmental responsibility. The electrification of transportation is reshaping the traditional view of industrial systems.
Accordingly, there is a growing need to address the implications of this technology in industrial environments. The current state-of-the-art regarding the emergency of PHEVs/PEVs
has been explored in this literature survey. First, the authors
gave a comprehensive overview of the PHEV/PEV charging
infrastructure requirements and the state-of-the-art in battery
technologies in the industrial environment. Energy storage (i.e.,
the PHEV/PEV battery) is the key enabling technology for the
electrification of transportation. The authors further explored
a variety of energy management systems. Without a sophisticated energy management system at the charging infrastructure,
large numbers of PHEVs/PEVs have the potential to threaten
the stability of the existing industrial system. The authors discussed the conceptual and practical knowledge of V2G, which
allows for the electric vehicles to feed power back directly to
the grid. In addition, V2G can allow easier integration of renewable resources and support the stability of the grid by providing ancillary services. The successful rollout of EVs also
relies on advanced communication technologies and industrial
informatics systems. The authors of this paper have presented
an overview of the appropriate information exchange architectures and framework to facilitate the effective integration of
PHEVs/PEVs.
In order to analyze these technical topics and research trends
properly, this paper provides an overview of the electrification of
transportation in the field of industrial informatics systems. Due
to the limited pages of this paper, the authors provide a survey of
the following technical topics: 1) PHEV/PEV charging facility
and PHEV/PEV battery; 2) intelligent energy management; and
3) V2G; 4) communication requirements.
As a final conclusion, this literature survey gives a general
view of both the concepts and applications of the electrification
of transportation. However, the research trends are not limited
to the topics covered in this paper. Due to the limited pages,
the authors apologize for not being able to list all the related
citations in this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] K. Crane, A. Goldthau, M. Toman, T. Light, S. Johnson, A. Nader,
A. Rabasa, and H. Dogo, Imported Oil and U.S. National Security Infrastructure, Safety, Environment Nat. Security Res. Division. Washington, DC, 2009.
[2] K. Parks, P. Denholm, and T. Markel, Cost and emissions associated with plug-in hybrid vehicle charging in the Xcel Energy Colorado
Service Territory, Natl. Renewable Energy Lab.. Golden, CO, May
2007.
[3] W. Kempton and J. Tomic, Vehicle-to-grid power implementation:
From stabilizing the grid to supporting large-scale renewable energy,
J. Power Sources, vol. 144, pp. 280294, 2005.

[4] K. Sikes, T. Gross, Z. Lin, J. Sullivan, T. Cleary, and J. Ward, U.S.


Dept. Energy, Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle market introduction
study: Final report, Washington, DC, Tech. Rep. DE2010-972306,
2010.
[5] M. Duvall and E. Knipping, Environmental assessment of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, Elect. Power Res. Inst.. Charlotte, NC, Jul.
2007.
[6] S. M. Lukic, C. Jian, R. C. Bansal, F. Rodriguez, and A. Emadi, Energy storage systems for automotive applications, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 22582267, Jun. 2008.
[7] S. M. Lukic, Charging ahead, IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., vol. 2, no.
4, pp. 2231, Dec. 2008.
[8] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, Performance evaluation of an EDA-based
large-scale plug-in hybrid electric vehicle charging algorithm, IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid (Special Issues on Transportation Electrification and Vehicle-to-Grid Applications), vol. PP, no. 99, Jun. 2011.
[Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=5875917
[9] N. DeForest, J. Funk, A. Lorimer, B. Ur, I. Sidhu, P. Kaminsky, and B.
Tenderich, Impact of widespread electric vehicle adoption on the electrical utility business-threats and opportunities, Center Entrepreneurship Technol., UC Berkeley. Berkeley, CA, 2009.
[10] Communication requirements for smart grid technologies, U.S. Dept.
Energy. Washington, DC, 2010.
[11] P. Behr, M.I.T. panel says a charging infrastructure may be a bigger
roadblock for electric vehicles than technology, M.I.T. panel says a
charging infrastructure may be a bigger roadblock for electric vehicles than technology, 2011. [Online]. Available: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=mit-panel-electric-vehicles
[12] SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Conductive
Coupler, SAE J1772, Troy, MI, 2010.
[13] Report of the Connector and Connecting Station CommitteeElectric
vehicle charging systems: Volume 2 Elect. Power Res. Inst., Charlotte,
NC, 1994.
[14] Electric vehicle charging infrastructure deployment guidelines for
the Oregon I-5 metro areas of Portland, Salem, Corvallis and Eugene, Electric Transportation Eng. Corp.,, 2010. [Online]. Available:
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/OIPP/docs/EVDeployGuidelines3-1.pdf
[15] U.S. Department of Energy Vehicle Technologies ProgramAdvanced Vehicle Testing Activity: Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Review, Battelle Energy Alliance. Columbus, OH, 2008.
[16] T. Markel, Plug-in electric vehicle infrastructure: A foundation for
electrified transportation, presented at the MIT Transp. Electrif.
Symp., Cambridge, MA, 2010.
[17] S. Vazquez, S. M. Lukic, E. Galvan, L. G. Franquelo, and J. M. Carrasco, Energy storage systems for transport and grid applications,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 38813895, Dec. 2010.
[18] J. Axsen, A. Burke, and K. Kurani, Batteries for plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles (PHEVs): Goals and the state of technology Circa 2008 Inst.
Transp. Studies, Univ. California, Davis. Davis, CA, 2008.
[19] A. Pesaran, T. Market, H. Tataria, and D. Howell, Battery requirements for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles: Analysis and rationale, presented at the 23rd Int. Elect. Veh. Symp. Expo., Anaheim, CA, 2007.
[20] M. Kromer and J. Heywood, Electric Powertrains: Opportunities and
Challenges in the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet, LFEE 2007-03 RP
Sloan Automotive Lab., Massachusetts Inst. Technol.. Cambridge,
MA, 2007.
[21] M. Duvall, Comparing the benefits and impacts of hybrid electric vehicle options for compact sedan and sport utility vehicles, Elect. Power
Res. Inst., Palo Alto, CA, Rep. 1006892, 2002.
[22] J. Cao and A. Emadi, Batteries need electronics, IEEE Ind. Electron.
Mag., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 2735, Mar. 2011.
[23] Y. Gao and M. Ehsani, Design and control methodology of plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 2, pp.
633640, Feb. 2010.
[24] H. Kim and K. G. Shin, DESA: Dependable, efficient, scalable architecture for management of large-scale batteries, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Informat., vol. PP, no. 99, Sep. 2011. [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=6009192
[25] A. Manenti, A. Abba, A. Merati, S. M. Savaresi, and A. Geraci, A
new BMS architecture based on cell redundancy, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Informat., vol. 58, no. 9, pp. 43144322, Sep. 2011.
[26] L. P. Fernandez;, T. Romn, R. Cossent, C. M. Domingo, and P. Fras,
Assessment of the impact of plug-in electric vehicles on distribution
networks, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 206213, Feb.
2011.
[27] J. A. P. Lopes, F. J. Soares, and P. M. R. Almeida, Integration of
electric vehicles in the electric power system, Proc. IEEE, vol. 99,
no. 1, pp. 168183, Jan. 2011.

SU et al.: A SURVEY ON THE ELECTRIFICATION OF TRANSPORTATION IN A SMART GRID ENVIRONMENT

[28] S. Shao, T. Zhang, M. Pipattanasomporn, and R. Saifur, Impact of


TOU rates on distribution load shapes in a smart grid with PHEV penetration, in Proc. IEEE PES Transmiss. Distrib. Conf. Expo., 2010, pp.
16.
[29] K. Qian, C. Zhou, M. Allan, and Y. Yuan, Modeling of load demand
due to EV battery charging in distribution systems, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 802810, May 2011.
[30] P. Mitra and G. K. Venayagamoorthy, Wide area control for improving
stability of a power system with plug-in electric vehicles, IET Generat., Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 4, pp. 11511163, 2010.
[31] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, and J. Driesen, The impact of charging
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 371380, Feb. 2010.
[32] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, Investigating a large-scale PHEV/PEV
parking deck in a smart grid environment, presented at the 43rd North
Amer. Power Symp., Boston, MA, Aug. 2011.
[33] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, Sensitivity analysis on battery modeling
to large-scale PHEV/PEV charging algorithms, in Proc. 37th Annu.
Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., Melbourne, Australia, Nov. 710,
2011, (Accepted).
[34] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, Evaluation on intelligent energy management
system for PHEVs using Monte Carlo method, in Proc. Electr. Utility
Deregulat. Restructur. Power Technol. Conf., Weihai, China, Jul. 69,
2011, pp. 16751680.
[35] C. Roe, J. Meisel, A. P. Meliopoulos, F. Evangelos, and T. Overbye,
Power system level impacts of PHEVs, in Proc. 42nd HI Int. Conf.
Syst. Sci., 2009, pp. 110.
[36] K. J. Dyke, N. Schofield, and M. Barnes, The impact of transport electrification on electrical networks, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57,
no. 12, pp. 39173926, Dec. 2010.
[37] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, An intelligent energy management system
for PHEVs considering demand response, presented at the FREEDM
Annu. Conf., Tallahassee, FL, 2010.
[38] P. Palensky and D. Dietrich, Demand side management: Demand response, intelligent energy systems, and smart loads, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Informat., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 15513203, Aug. 2011.
[39] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, Performance evaluation of a PHEV parking
station using particle swarm optimization, in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. General Meet., 2011, pp. 16.
[40] M. D. Galus and G. Andersson, Demand management of grid connected plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), in Proc. IEEE Energy
2030 Conf., 2008, pp. 18.
[41] E. Sortomme, M. M. Hindi, S. D. J. MacPherson, and S. S. Venkata,
Coordinated charging of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles to minimize
distribution system losses, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 1, pp.
198205, Mar. 2011.
[42] A. Y. Saber and G. K. Venayagamoorthy, Plug-in vehicles and renewable energy sources for cost and emission reductions, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 12291238, Apr. 2011.
[43] C. Hutson, G. K. Venayagamoorthy, and K. A. Corzine, Intelligent
scheduling of hybrid and electric vehicle storage capacity in a parking
lot for profit maximization in grid power transactions, in Proc. IEEE
Energy 2030 Conf., 2008, pp. 18.
[44] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, Intelligent energy scheduling at a municipal PHEV/PEV parking deck via multi-objective optimization, IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid (Special Issue on Computational Intelligence Applications in Smart Grids), 2011, (Extended Abstract Accepted).
[45] R. J. Bessa and M. A. Matos, Economic and technical management
of an aggregation agent for electric vehicles: A literature survey, Eur.
Trans. Electr. Power, Feb. 14, 2011 [Online]. Available: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/etep.565/full, DOI: 10.1002/etep.565.
[46] H. Sekyung, H. Soohee, and K. Sezaki, Development of an optimal vehicle-to-grid aggregator for frequency regulation, IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 6572, Jun. 2010.
[47] E. Sortomme and M. A. El-Sharkawi, Optimal charging strategies for
unidirectional vehicle-to-grid, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 1,
pp. 131138, Mar. 2011.
[48] A. H. Hajimiragha, C. A. Canizares, M. W. Fowler, and A. Elkamel,
Optimal transition to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in Ontario,
Canada, considering the electricity-grid limitations, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electon., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 690701, Feb. 2010.
[49] C. Guille and G. Gross, The integration of PHEV aggregations into
a power system with wind resources, in Proc. Bulk Power Syst. Dyn.
Control (iREP) Symp., 2010, pp. 19.
[50] W. Kempton and A. Dhanju, Electric Vehicles With V2G: Storage for
Large-Scale Wind Power. Bedford, NY: Windtech Int., 2006.
[51] T. Markel, M. Kuss, and P. Denholm, Communication and control
of electric drive vehicles supporting renewables, in Proc. Veh. Power
Propulsion Conf., 2009, pp. 2734.

[52] W. Kempton and J. Tomic, Vehicle-to-grid power fundamentals: Calculating capacity and net revenue, J. Power Sources, vol. 144, pp.
268279, Jun. 2005.
[53] W. Kempton, J. Tomic, S. Letendre, A. Brooks, and T. Lipmanet, Vehicle-to-grid power: Battery, hybrid, and fuel cell vehicles as resources
for distributed electric power in California CARB, CEPA, Los Angeles, CA, Res. Rep. UCD-ITS-RR-01-03, 2001.
[54] W. Kempton and S. E. Letendre, Electric vehicles as a new power
source for electric utilities, Transport. Res., vol. 2, pt. D, pp. 157175,
1997.
[55] T. Moura and F. Moura, Vehicle-to-grid systems for sustainable
development: An integrated energy analysis, Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Change, vol. 75, pp. 10911108, 2008.
[56] B. K. Sovacool and R. F. Hirsh, Beyond batteries: An examination of
the benefits and barriers to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)
and a vehicle-to-grid (V2G) transition, Energy Policy, vol. 37, pp.
10951103, 2009.
[57] S.-L. Andersson, A. K. Elofsson, and M. D. Galus, Plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles as regulating power providers: Case studies of Sweden
and Germany, Energy Policy, vol. 38, pp. 27512762, 2010.
[58] K. J. Dyke, N. Schofield, and M. Barnes, The impact of transport electrification on electrical networks, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57,
no. 12, pp. 39173926, Dec. 2010.
[59] A. N. Brooks, Vehicle-to-Grid Demonstration Project: Grid Regulation
Ancillary Service With a Battery Electric Vehicle. San Dimas, CA:
AC Propulsion, Inc., 2002.
[60] K. M. Zhang and C. D. White, Using vehicle-to-grid technology for
frequency regulation and peak-load reduction, J. Power Sources, vol.
196, pp. 39723980, 2011.
[61] L. H. Kempton and W. Kempton, Integration of renewable energy into
the transport and electricity sectors through V2G, Energy Policy, vol.
36, pp. 35783587, Sep. 2008.
[62] W. Su and M.-Y. Chow, Optimal energy management for a plug-in
electric vehicle enabled charging infrastructure with vehicle-to-grid capability, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2011, (Under Review).
[63] M. D. Galus, S. Koch, and G. Andersson, Provision of load frequency
control by PHEVs, controllable loads, and a cogeneration unit, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 45684582, Oct. 2011.
[64] J. R. Pillai and B. Bak-Jensen, Integration of vehicle-to-grid in the
Western Danish power system, IEEE Trans. Sustainable Energy, vol.
2, no. 1, pp. 1219, Jan. 2011.
[65] U. K. Madawala and D. J. Thrimawithana, A bidirectional inductive
power interface for electric vehicles in V2G systems, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 47894896, Oct. 2011.
[66] C. Quinn, D. Zimmerle, and T. H. Bradley, The effect of communication architecture on the availability, reliability, and economics of
plug-in hybrid electric vehicle-to-grid ancillary services, J. Power
Sources, vol. 195, pp. 15001509, 2010.
[67] T. Sauter and M. Lobashov, End-to-end communication architecture for smart grids, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 4, pp.
12181228, Apr. 2011.
[68] Y. Qiang, J. A. Barria, and T. C. Green, Communication infrastructures for distributed control of power distribution networks, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 316327, May 2011.
[69] V. C. Gungor, B. Lu, and G. P. Hancke, Opportunities and challenges
of wireless sensor networks in smart grid, IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat.,
vol. 57, no. 10, pp. 35573564, Oct. 2010.
[70] F. Benzi, N. Anglani, E. Bassi, and L. Frosini, Electricity smart meters
interfacing the households, IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 58, no. 10,
pp. 44874494, Oct. 2011.
[71] V. Gungor, D. Sahin, T. Kocak, S. Ergut, C. Buccella, C. Cecati, and G.
Hancke, Smart grid technologies: Communications technologies and
standards, IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 529539, Sep.
2011.
[72] W. Wang, Y. Xu, and M. Khanna, A survey on the communication
architectures in smart grid, Comput. Netw., Jul. 2011.
[73] Smart Energy ProfileMarketing Requirements Docement
ZigBee+HomePlug Joint Working Group, Mar. 11, 2009. [Online]. Available: http://www.homeplug.org/tech/ZBHP_SE_MRD_
090624.pdf
[74] M. K. Lee, R. E. Newman, H. A. Latchman, S. Katar, and L. Yonge,
HomePlug 1.0 powerline communication LANsProtocol description and performance results, Int. J. Commun. Syst., vol. 16, pp.
447473, 2003.
[75] P. Kinney, ZigBee technology: Wireless Control That Simply Works,
ZigBee Alliance, 2003.
[76] D. Gislason, Zigbee Wireless Networking. New York: Elsevier, 2008.
[77] N. Baker, ZigBee and Bluetooth strengths and weaknesses for industrial applications, Comput. Control Eng. J., vol. 16, pp. 2025,
Apr.-May 2005.

10

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, VOL. 8, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2012

[78] P. Kulshrestha, K. Swaminathan, M.-Y. Chow, and S. M. Lukic, Evaluation of ZigBee communication platform for controlling the charging
of PHEVs at a municipal parking deck, in Proc. 2009 IEEE Veh. Power
Propulsion Conf., 2009, pp. 12111214.
[79] W. Su, W. Zeng, and M.-Y. Chow, A digital testbed for a PHEV/PEV
enabled parking lot in a smart grid environment, in Proc. Innovat.
Smart Grid Technol., Washington, DC, Jan. 1719, 2012, (Accepted).
[80] S. Shrestha, GSM vs. CDMA 2006. [Online]. Available: http://www.
scienceray.com/Technology/Information/Cellular-Network-Technologies.114821
[81] H. Farhangi, The path of the smart grid, IEEE Power Energy Mag.,
vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1828, Jan.-Feb. 2010.
[82] H. Khurana, M. Hadley, L. Ning, and D. A. Frincke, Smart-grid security issues, IEEE Security Privacy Mag., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 8185,
Jan.-Feb. 2010.
[83] Q. Morante, N. Ranaldo, A. Vaccaro, and E. Zimeo, Pervasive grid
for large-scale power systems contingency analysis, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Informat., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 165175, Aug. 2006.
[84] G. N. Ericsson, Cyber security and power system communication: Essential parts of a smart grid infrastructure, IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 15011507, Jul. 2010.
[85] C. Alcaraz and J. Lopez, A security analysis for wireless sensor mesh
networks in highly critical systems, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern.
C: Appl. Rev., vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 419428, Jul. 2010.
[86] Z. Lu, X. Lu, W. Wang, and C. Wang, Review and evaluation of security threats on the communication networks in the smart grid, in Proc.
Military Commun. Conf., 2010, pp. 18301835.
[87] Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), Standard FIPS PUB 197,
National Institute for Standards and Technology,, Gaithersburg, MD,
2001.
[88] R. Newman, L. Yonge, S. Gavette, and R. Anderson, HomePlug AV
security mechanisms, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Power Line Commun.
Appl., 2007, pp. 366371.
[89] K. M. S. Soyjaudah, M. A. Hosany, and A. Jamaloodeen, Design and
implementation of Rijndael algorithm for GSM encryption, in Proc.
Joint IST Workshop Mobile Future/Symp. Trends Commun., 2004, pp.
106109.
[90] A. Carcano, A. Coletta, M. Guglielmi, M. Masera, I. N. Fovino, and
A. Trombetta, A multidimensional critical state analysis for detecting
intrusions in SCADA systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 7, no.
2, pp. 179186, May 2011.
[91] F. Maci-Prez, F. Mora-Gimeno, D. Marcos-Jorquera, J. A.
Gil-Martnez-Abarca, H. Ramos-Morillo, and I. Lorenzo-Fonseca,
Network intrusion detection system embedded on a smart sensor,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 722732, Mar. 2011.
[92] P. McDaniel and S. McLaughlin, Security and privacy challenges in
the smart grid, IEEE Security Privacy Mag., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 7577,
May-Jun. 2009.
Wencong Su (S06) received the B.S. degree (with
distinction) in electrical engineering from Clarkson
University, Potsdam, NY, in 2008, and the M.S.
degree in electrical engineering from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg,
in 2009. He is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North Carolina State University,
Raleigh.
He was a R&D Engineer Intern at ABB U.S.
Corporate Research Center, Raleigh, NC, from May
2009 to August 2009. His research interests include smart grid, grid integration
of plug-in electric vehicles, large-scale optimization, microgrid, and battery
modeling.

Habiballah Rahimi-Eichi (S08) received the B.Sc.


and M.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering from the
Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran, and
the Khaje-Nasir University of Technology, Tehran,
Iran, respectively. He is a currently working toward
the Ph.D. degree with the ADAC Research Group,
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
North Carolina State University, Raleigh.
His research interests include intelligent energy
management system, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, market-based optimization methods, auction
theory, and smart grid.

Wente Zeng (S09) received the B.S. and M.S.


degrees in automation from Shanghai Jiaotong
University, Shanghai, China, in 2006 and 2009,
respectively. He is currently working toward the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh.
He has also been a part of the Advanced Diagnosis,
Automation, and Control Laboratory, North Carolina
State University, since September 2009. His current
research interests include networked control system,
distributed control, and system security.

Mo-Yuen Chow (S81M82SM93F07) received the B.S. degree from the University of
Wisconsin, Madison, in 1982, and the M.Eng. and
Ph.D. degrees from Cornell University, Ithaca, NY,
in 1983 and 1987, respectively.
He then joined the Department of Electrical
and Computer Engineering, North Carolina State
University, Raleigh, where he has been a Professor
since 1999. He has established the Advanced Diagnosis and Control Laboratory, North Carolina State
University. He has published one book, several book
chapters, and more than 100 journal and conference articles. His research
focuses on fault diagnosis and prognosis, distributed control, and computational
intelligence. He has been applying his research to areas including mechatronics,
power distribution systems, distributed generation, motors and robotics.
Dr. Chow received the IEEE Region-3 Joseph M. Biedenbach Outstanding
Engineering Educator Award and the IEEE Eastern North Carolina Section Outstanding Engineering Educator Award. He is the Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS.