What is the deal with the balance in energy consumption?

Paweł Baczyński

Energy transfer is a continuous process, however, the method of balancing energy consumption is divided into discrete half-hour periods called settlement periods. In the energy market, this settlement is a manner that aligns the difference between energy sold to customers and purchased. So, what is the deal with the balance in energy consumption, how it applies to 

BSCP520 – Unmetered Supplies Registered in SMRS

The energy settlement process would not be overly complicated if all exit points were metered. In practice, this is not always possible, since unmetered supplies are also allowed. This sort of energy consumption needs to be calculated. Unmetered electricity is used e.g. by public street lights, traffic lights, and extra common electric equipment. As a result, unmetered energy estimates for about 1.25% of GB’s total electricity utilization.

To handle these unmetered supplies there is created, in the Supplier Meter Registration Service (SMRS), a dedicated BSCP520 procedure. The common rule indicates that all energy transfer points connected to the Licensed Distribution System should be metered. Exceptions to this rule are called Unmetered Supplies. These Unmetered Supplies are to be approved by the Unmetered Supplies Operator appointed by Licensed Distribution System Operator to act on its behalf.

An Unmetered Supply can be accepted if the electrical load is of a predictable nature (no unexpected spikes etc.) and either less than 500W or it is not practical to install a meter.

Equivalent Meter and Estimated Annual Consumption

As consumption cannot be metered, it needs to be derived. There are two possible scenarios:

an Equivalent Meter – It is a hardware/software solution, that provides Half Hourly data

an Estimated Annual Consumption – calculated by UMSO (The Unmetered Supplies Operator) to estimate annual consumption per MSID based on circuit watts, percentage of full load used, and the number of devices.

We’ll take a closer look at an Equivalent Meter. The procedure of Half Hourly Trading, Equivalent Meter consists of 3 steps:

The Meter Administrator calculates and validates metering data from the Equivalent Meter for each MSID (Metering System Identifier) for each settlement day and sends that to HHDC (Half Hourly Data Collector). The format of the file is defined.

HHDC validates this data. In case there is missing or invalid information it sends the details to the Meter Administrator.

MA re-sends corrected information if necessary.

There are two types of Equivalent Meters:

passive meters, that allocate consumption across the settlement periods based on the relation of annual burning hours and the duration of the day,

dynamic meters, that allocate consumption across the settlement periods based on the number of PECUs – Photo-Electric Control Unit – and actual switching times.

 has found that annual energy consumption is typically 1% lower using the switching times provided by the PECU Array compared with a passive calculation. As a result, many customers save thousands of pounds each year.

An Equivalent Meter needs to perform calculations to produce Summary Inventory, necessary documents i.a. for accounting purposes, and settlements with vendors.

Charge Code specifies the associated circuit watts and other technical information for the Apparatus. Switch Regime specifies the switching times and other technical information for the electric equipment.

For Charge Code & Switch Regime multiply the number of items by the circuit watts for the relevant Charge Code by the seconds attributable to the Switch Regime and divide by 1,000 to determine the kWh.

The second's attributable need to be derived either from

from the duration of the day (sunset/sunrise times provided by Astronomical Almanac)

This process is repeated for each half hour of the day.

Thanks to unmetered energy supplies, unique applications in public infrastructure and an elaborated billing system Public Charging Points in Great Britain became easy to develop. In 2019 emobility market was 

 to reach ~7-10 million EVs by 2030, which means this segment will require ~28,000 Public Charge Points by 2030.

 that there are 19,828 accessible public charging points of which 3,568 are rapid chargers. Behind the user-oriented approach, there is a whole network with various participants - private and public - creating accessible and often cost-shared solutions. By regulating settlements between vendors in Great Britain the green growth ultimately contributed to the dynamic development of emobility market. Procedures such as BSCP520 regulate the settlement of unmetered energy consumption accelerating emobility growth. This case was to present detailed, one of the successful ways to unlock greener solutions applied through a public-private sector collaboration.

Subscribe to get a free PDF version of our comprehensive publication!

Ebook - The Growing concept of e-Mobility

Research data, latest achievements, and statistics on e-mobility development

Being an eMobility leader in various projects across multiple startups, Piotr was responsible for OCPI and OCPP integration as well as EMP and CPO platforms development. With extensive expertise in the open standards field and eMobility tech solutions, he is leading teams of experienced developers and contributing with invaluable knowledge and experience.

Piotr Majcher

Research explanation of e-Mobility as a Service

Before the digital revolution and user-centric approach, the concept of accessible, new forms of transportation was the future vision of what life could be like. With the rapid growth of technology, mobile devices, enhanced battery capacities, wide Internet connection, investments in new unexplored forms of service delivery, and quick social adaptation in the last ten years we have witnessed a great transformation.

Raising enthusiasm boosted consumption and proved that rapid adaptation is possible and widely accepted. New economic models have begun to take into account sharing concepts and value the tangible benefits of such solutions. In a sharing economy, not used assets such as parked cars and extra bedrooms can be rented out. We transferred from owning to renting. And this concept widely approved first by Uber users moved to other transport areas offering new possibilities. In the Alternative Journal article, 

 , Ray Tumulty (2014) the sharing economy is described as a clearly urban phenomenon. To achieve economies of scale for shared economy services satisfactory population density is required. Moreover, these services are seen as an extra option, not a replacement for traditional sectors. Ridesharing is used along with public transportation in cities.

With the growing success of rented items and services, new forms of transportation options come to the market. The mobility concept grew to form a comprehensive ecosystem offering numerous moving variants, such as city bikes, electric scooters, car rides, ticket purchasing options, city traffic monitoring, planning the most convenient route, parking options, integrated payments, and available charging options for ‘e’ users. All available in real-time from the mobile app on one’s phone. This progress developed the term 

 , which covers a wide range of mobility services available on the market, and its integral part becomes a shared economy providing extra value for participants.

On a high-level, the MaaS ecosystem includes transport infrastructure, transportation services, transport information, and payment services. Within the ecosystem, the common objective is the delivery of a seamless mobility experience and transportation network improvement by utilizing the benefits of each service - public and private. Besides, other participants such as local authorities or data administration companies can collaborate to smooth the operation of the services and improve their profitability.

One of the MaaS ecosystem examples was presented by the Siemens Mobility Division in 2016 for Tampere City, Finland. The ecosystem is build of 4 main elements: service providers; a business-to-business (B2B) platform; mobility retailers; and the users. The intention of the project was to unite the existing and upcoming transport services with the operations of the local paratransit services.

A similar approach on a high level was presented by König project ‘Mobility As A Service for Linking Europe’. Four different levels define the public and regulatory level, the transport and logistics service providers level, the mobility service level, and the end-user level. On the basis of similar concepts and definitions, a framework for Mobility as a service was developed.

From a business perspective, MaaS is described by Kamargianni and Matyas in the paper ‘The Business Ecosystem of Mobility-as-a-Service’[1](2017) as ‘the wider network of enterprises that influences how a dominant company, in this case, the MaaS provider, creates and capture value’.

To support theoretical premises on shared mobility, a survey conducted by McKinsey&Company (2017) provides some insight into the consumer’s opinion on ride-hailing and car-sharing. Respondents were asked how their usage of ride-hailing and car-sharing services will change within the next two years. In both cases, over 60% responded that it will increase or increase significantly. Shared mobility is mostly favored in urban areas, but seems to be less attractive for running errands or multi-stop shopping trips.

We are an integral part of the next global transformation, where alternative fuels and green energy takes charge. The concept explained above has been extended with ‘e’ - a possibility to travel in an eco-friendly way, where ‘e’ stands for electric solutions.

Electric Mobility as a service combines Mobility as a Service (MaaS), Electric Mobility Systems (EMS), and Shared Electric Mobility Services (SEMS) [2]. As a concept eMaaS operates upon MaaS, where the last one became one of the complementary components. With that defined, all MaaS participants become, as a consequence, eMaaS attendees. Providing they offer electric mobility solutions.

Electric Mobility System (EMS) covers technologies (batteries, charging technologies, drivetrains, and EVs), infrastructure (physical and organizational of charging stations, electricity grid, information and communication technology), and users (manufacturers, suppliers, end-users, service providers, governments, and agents).

Shared Electric Mobility Services’ (SEMS) applies to a new economy implementation, where instead of ownership there is an on-a-need basis share connected by the technology with users and providers. SEMS replies to the environmental, social, financial, and transportation-related benefits that had already been correlated to emobility and shared mobility practice connecting both. Five business approaches are proposed:

Membership-based (e.g. e-bike sharing, e-car sharing, e-ridesharing, e-ride hailing, e-scooter sharing, e-bus sharing),

Peer-to-Peer(e.g. e-car sharing, e-bike sharing, e-scooter sharing),

Non-membership-based (e.g. e-car rental, elimousine rental),

For-hire (e.g. e-car/bike/scooter sharing, e-ridesharing e-carpooling),

Mass transit systems (e.g. e-Public Transport, airport autonomous shuttles).

As a part of a wider concept, combined with two other components MaaS & EMS, together provides multiple eco-friendly transportation possibilities. Successful implementation of such a concept requires multi-level support, well-designed system architecture, and an extensive network in public structures.

The user-centric approach will always be foreground. It applies to the development of the widely recognized concept of e-mobility as a service. From accessible payment methods for single ticket purchasing, subscriptions, to well-developed charging networks and various means of transport access. At each stage of the proposition should be declared value.

We are still in the early stages of what could be called e-Mobility as a service. Most customer journeys are under development, and achieving overall flow is still in its infancy. There is a lot of research to be done, but there is room for the general necessary approaches. Each of the participants, in order to achieve success and remain successful in this growing market, should remember the needs and behavior of the end-customers - have in mind that ½ users are likely to bail on service or purchase because of a single bad experience.

One of the success factors will be easy, integrated payments, giving preferable plan or demand models.

Plan option: Participants pay a monthly fee befitted to their transportation needs. Such plans can be split into an urban commuter, family, business, and casual. They include all public transport options as well as taxi, rideshare, carshare, etc, to cover individual needs.

Pay on-demand alternative: Paid as traveled with the difference that the payment is for the whole trip in one go independent of transport means. So if in need to take the train, bus, and then taxi on one trip, it’s all included in one, joint payment, executed automatically via smartphone.

Technology changed the way people consume goods and services. With handy devices, ¾ of consumers expect the service within five minutes from the initial contact. The same share wants ‘the simple experience’. From all players, customers expect immediate action, personalization, and convenience. This requires a broader view focusing on journeys, not only touchpoints, which will become a framework for further expansion.

When it comes to user preferences, whether it applies to simple app development or complex system design, it’s been always about developing a complete value proposition that answers the needs of the user and delivers a convenient solution. With a unique experience, trust, and the right technology that supports EV drivers, e-mobility participants can succeed.

E-mobility revolution driven by technology

The entire development of various e-mobility solutions is powered by rapid smartphone penetration. Since the handy device gives us access to countless possibilities, the way people consume goods and services changed. As a matter of fact, smartphones enable and will be a core factor for rapid growth in eMaaS concepts and Smart City solutions. Among the technologies being developed electric cars, route optimization resolutions, car-to-car communication will change the way we commute itself.

In search of efficiency, communication will become a smart blend of technology, infrastructure, and users. Electromobility and autonomous driving development are considered to be the catalyst for changes taking place in urban consumption. E-mobility secures eco-friendly and efficient vehicles on the roads. E-driving became globally a high priority. Climate change, oil shortage (Statistical Review of World Energy 2017 estimates that the world’s currently known oil reserves will last +/- 50 years given current levels of consumption), and air pollution brought forward the development of green solutions. As long as the power is received from renewable sources e-cars and hybrids represent the most efficient and environmentally friendly ways of driving.

Core components of business and technology are connectivity solutions, integrating components, user interface, infrastructure development, battery technology, driving software and product design, high accuracy maps, secure solutions, data storage and processing, between-vehicle communication. Well-developed services build upon a user-centric approach, providing integrated, smart, handy assistance.

According to a survey conducted by Otonomo [3] among the citizens of European countries, most car owners think that manufacturers collect their data for product improvement or development, advertising, segmentation driver types, and learning more about habits, reliability, usage, or preventative maintenance.

Consumers declare that they would love to have access to data generated by their cars. Three-quarters of survey respondents showed an interest in receiving data held by OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturer) more than twice a month and nearly 50% of respondents would love to receive data frequently (even up to once a day).

Additional information consumers would love to receive are car alerting about dangerous conditions ahead (72%), early necessary maintenance and repairs detection (59%), car knowing the traffic and suggesting an alternative route (59%), an app that allows deliveries to be made to your car’s trunk (51%), car suggesting nearby, available parking (48%) and software that allows having fuel delivered (46%). So, not only drivers do not mind gathering information but also would appreciate receiving feedback and insights.

One of the widely appreciated models by the 2 billion consumer segment is car sharing [4]. Generation Y (born between 1977 and 1994) desires connectivity and convenience. Having numerous transportation options Millennials are more likely to choose on-demand services instead of ownership. New mobility service providers connect seamlessly drivers with passengers (carpooling, taxi) or passengers to cars (car-sharing).

The latter one, powered by technology and finest logistics, offers great value for one-way trips, as well as planned round-routes. Without bearing the cost and effort of car ownership Millennials can get a unique feeling of driving. The sharing economy provides favorite conditions with a blend of technology and service without exhausting the possibilities. Car sharing leads in big cities where scale effect is easy to achieve by, among other things, cost reduction and lifestyle changes. To confirm this, in 2019 Global Car Sharing market value was 2.5B USD (Global Growth Trends) and is expected to grow up to 9B USD globally in the next 6 years.

Car sharing quickly became outstanding among other mobility services thanks to a wide range of business models applied, offering different experiences and pricing systems. One of the success factors is the flexibility provided with usage areas and distances to be traveled. On the basis of a well-known car rental model, three concepts were developed: 

free-floating, stationary, and peer-to-peer car sharing

. The latter business model, where individuals can offer their car rental to private users via a platform, successfully conquered the French market. P2P offers long-distance transportation mode for longer routes and became an alternative for short-term rental or carpooling.

Allows to pick up the vehicle and return anywhere within a certain area, operates mostly in the city centers, usually providing smaller cars, in cooperation with local authorities providing dedicated parking spaces. When it comes to car sharing in a free-floating model, many providers see the investment as a strategic step, as a new promotional channel, and direct access to customers’ insights.

Free-floating business model success factors are:

location (high density to reach the scale),

cooperation with local authorities or private sector (e.g. in Poland IKEA offered dedicated parking spaces for Traficar as a part of yet another transport service), and

convenience (the majority of the fleet consists of city driving cars).

E.g. In France free-floating cars, according to a study by Les Échos newspaper, represent 26% of carsharing vehicles. Among these, 44% are electric. Free-floating electric car-sharing in Paris emerged in late 2018 with the following launches of Free2Move, Car2Go, and Zity. Over 1,400 electric vehicles were deployed across the French capital by these companies.

What is interesting, on the basis of free-floating, other urban transportations are offered, such as electric scooters, city bikes, e-bikes, and mopeds.

The oldest model with the start and endpoint at the same station, dedicated to round routes. With different needs, the lack of flexibility is being replaced with a wide fleet variety. Stationary car providers usually operate in smaller cities and rural regions. What is interesting, they do not operate globally (with one exception Flinkster by Deutsche Bahn Rent). Success is linked to extensive local market knowledge and customers' needs understanding. They often rely on other providers' cooperation, creating broader networks offering free-floating alike experience on a long-distance driving.

Key success factors in this oldest, but nourished with fine technology, are:

location in medium-sized cities and rural areas

availability (often located by the airports or train stations)

pricing based on hourly rates or distance

wide fleet selection for various purposes

Some global players see the opportunity in free-floating, e.g. in 2011 as a joint venture of BMW and Sixt established DriveNow, other invest in stationary car sharing, e.g. Volkswagen by investing took over 60% of Greenwheels in 2013.

In February 2020, Daimler AG and BMW announced yet another car-sharing services partnership under a new brand, 

 . By merging Car2Go and DriveNow, 'ShareNow’ became a market leader, being present in 20 European cities with a fleet of over 20 000 vehicles. ShareNow actually is a mix of both concepts mentioned - a combination of stationary car-sharing and free-floating. Various paths of car sharing are being tested, thanks to a broad range of possibilities offered by technology. In October 2020, Toyota launched its new car-sharing service to provide a wide range of mobility services for short-term use on the Japanese market. Based on these few examples we can only expect new services to be tested and developed. Combining traditional concepts with modern technologies may soon influence consumer behavior, look at certain aspects of e-mobility as well as create new businesses. Hence, the theoretical aspects of emobility presented earlier reflect the real changes.

P2P seems to be a niche market, is the only concept where private individuals offer their own vehicles. The exchange takes place via a dedicated platform, offering insurance and telematic equipment to provide smooth access. The car must be returned the same day within the pick-up area and used for round trips. The pricing provides a great alternative to car rentals or stationary car sharing. A decentralized fleet offers a wide range of brands and models.

Being called a niche, drivy initially operated in the French market, quickly converted to 

 , and operates now in the UK, Germany, Austria, France, Spain, Belgium, and the USA. Undoubtedly, the P2P car-sharing success happened due to most favored factors among consumers, similar to Airbnb, unique value combined with technology resulting in a great alternative to other, more traditional services. A prime technology - the platform and telematics ease the use. Thanks to one of the shared economy principles, P2P car sharing offers a diverse, accessible network, quickly spreading to new markets, providing value to each participant. Moreover, the P2P concept getaround is empowered by well-designed insurance policies to cover lending concerns.

The increasing traffic congestion in urban districts doubled with overloaded public transport facilities is boosting the car-sharing market revenue. The emergence of electric vehicles in public areas will be accelerating in order to reduce gas emissions. Attracted by extra benefits, such as incentives, 

 , parking spaces in exclusive, centered areas, providers will enhance the electric cars fleet.

Although the concept of car sharing is enthusiastically acclaimed this doesn’t mean that ‘ownership’ will go into a niche. Today’s consumer profile on the EV market is evolving from early adopters to mass adoption. According to a survey conducted by Accenture [5] in 2019 in China, Europe, and the US, respondents declared that they expect to own a car in the future. When asked if they would resign from possessing in favor of services, nearly 50% would consider giving up ownership in favor of integrated mobility services. What is more interesting in Europe, 55% of premium car owners and 41% of non-premium owners are more likely to switch.

One more factor may place a sharing idea further afield. A 

 conducted in June 2020 by cars.com showed that 70% of respondents declared the coronavirus has led to a reduction in commuting, and 49% reported their commute has been greatly reduced or become nonexistent. 58% who previously commuted via a public vehicle - carpool, taxi, ride-share, or bus - 44% of them said they’ve had a reduced the need, and 15% reported having no need to commute. 38% stated they usually rely on a bus to commute to work, 42% declared they’re riding less and 15% said they aren’t riding the bus at all. More than 55% of respondents actively consider buying or leasing a car, and 7% actually acquired a vehicle due to the pandemic. What is more, the pandemic became a reason to consider buying a car for 20% of respondents. The decisions were strictly dictated by the concerns about public transportation and the sanitation of ride-sharing vehicles.

Electric Vehicle market is going mainstream

Although the term electromobility or e-mobility applies to all means of transport powered by electric energy such as e-bikes or pedelecs, electric motorbikes, e-buses, and e-trucks we focused on e-cars. Several factors contributed to rapid EV penetration in Europe. From governmental declaration to achieve zero-emission goals by 2050, research and development, a wide range of possibilities to scale up fast provided by technology to raising environmental awareness. In this paper, we provide all the necessary information but starting from the beginning. Among the available options for electric cars, we have:

Hybrids (HEV) - Hybrid contains both an electric and combustion engine. The battery is charged via the engine while driving and stores the braking energy at the same time.

Plug-in Hybrid (PHEV) - The battery stores the braking energy in plug-in hybrids. Plus the car can be charged via the grid.

Range Extended Electric Vehicle (REEV) - is efficiently an all-electric vehicle, with all the motive power provided by an electric motor, but with a small internal combustion engine present to generate additional electric power. I.e. it might be viewed as a series hybrid with a much larger battery, namely, 10–20 kWh;

Battery Electric Vehicle (EV or BEV) - The vehicle is fully powered by the battery charged via the grid.

Two-way charging technology. When EV is charged, AC (Alternating Current) from the grid is converted to DC (Direct Current) power. Possible to be implemented by the EV’s owner or charger’s converter. What is more, this technology allows the energy stored in batteries to powerhouse/external load (V2H) or send it back to the grid (V2G).

Nothing new here, but some may not know that EVs wireless charging is possible. The vehicle’s battery can be empowered wirelessly by parking the car on a spot with a charger on the ground. Just like wireless phone chargers. Although, the amount of exchanged energy in these wireless systems notably outpaces a wireless cell phone charger, seems like a great challenge for startups developing them. These innovations must be 100% safe, certified solutions. One of the examples of a park & charge solution is Canadian startup ELIX.

A fully charged car in 20-60 minutes is possible, although the ultimate goal is to fully charge a vehicle in less than 10 minutes. Just like gasoline at the petrol station. For example, GBatteries is working on advanced super-fast charging technology without the influence of battery life. The pioneers like Tesla, ABB, ChargePoint, EVbox, and other OEMs and networks offer fast-charging stations. Among other obstacles associated with handling the huge power demanded, if not done correctly, fast charging can lead to faster battery degradation.

Similarly, just like power banks for mobile phones, startups are building portable charging systems for EVs. For example, SparkCharge offers stackable batteries that can deliver up to 60-75 miles per full stack and work together to deliver the exact amount of range needed.

Since the most comfortable ways of charging EV is still overnight, for those who don’t have a garage or access to any charging station nearby, British startup ZUMO offers a solution for those who own or want to own an EV but lack a driveway. They pick up the car, bring it to a charging station, and bring it back to the owner the following morning, fully charged and ready to go solving the issue of charging in big cities.

With the technology that uses copper coils embedded under roads and connected to the electricity grid, along with receivers installed under vehicles the dynamic charging is being in deployment in Sweden for E-bus with a Super- Capacitor battery and a heavy Duty E-Truck with a Li-Ion battery. Yet another EV charging resolution proposed by Electreon. Similar projects also take place in Germany and Israel. Recently Italy joined the testing phase with a one-kilometer examination section of the A35 highway between Brescia and Milan. If the pilot becomes successful the entire 62-kilometer (both ways will be approx. 150 km) length of the A35 freeway will follow.

This allows to intelligently manage EV charging by connecting it to the grid. Smart charging is all about connecting charging points with users and operators. Each time an EV is plugged in, the charging station sends information (i.e. charging time, speed, etc.) via Wi-Fi or Bluetooth to i.e. a centralized cloud-based management platform. Smart charging can provide additional data such as information about the local grid’s capacity and how energy is currently being used at the charging site (house, office building, supermarket, etc.). The gathered data is being analyzed and visualized in real-time by the software behind the platform. With smart charging, charging operators can control and regulate energy usage easily and remotely through one platform, or mobile application. EV owners can benefit by using a mobile app to monitor and pay for their charging sessions from anywhere, any time. Smart charging offers power-sharing, dynamic power-sharing, and power boost. It also allows vehicle owners, businesses, and network operators to control how much energy EVs are taking from the grid and when. For example, Wallbox offers such a solution. A wall-mounted box can be installed in a private garage or a condominium or company parking lot. Wallbox is being recommended by several electric vehicle manufacturers, e.g. Renault.

With the most common charging option on the market comes three main types of EV charging: rapid, fast, and slow. These represent the power outputs, and hence charging speeds, available to charge an EV. Each charging device type has an associated set of connectors that are designed for low- or high-power use, and for either AC or DC charging.

 enable to recharge an EV up to 80% in 20 min to 1 hour, depending on the battery capacity. With 50 kW DC charging is possible on one of two connector types using either the CHAdeMO or CCS charging standards, 43 kW AC charging on one connector - Type 2 standard, 100+ kW DC ultra-rapid charging is possible on one of two connector types: CCS or CHAdeMO. All rapid units have tethered cables.

The growing concept of e-Mobility as a Service

Open Charge Point Protocol migration from 1.6 to 2.0.1

Keeping IT systems up-to-date, even with basic tasks like dependencies or newly coming company-wide best practices is challenging. Even if all components are maintained in-house, it’s time-consuming to keep all areas updated. This applies also to keeping up-to-date external protocols our system uses. Whether we are integrated with Stripe over HTTP API, or with thousands of charging stations over OCPP, it’s good to know what the latest API version introduces. All this in order to examine if there are new opportunities upfront our business that can be supported by the newest version of the protocol we use. Or maybe our market requires covering long-waited, flow enabling updates. Let’s dive deeper into the new features introduced in OCPP 2.0.1 to see if it’s worth spending time upgrading your CPO platform.

OCPP 2.0.1 introduced business-oriented features but also technical improvements like device management or security. Those aspects are likewise very important, but this article gathers the latest OCPP updates focusing on the business angle.

More sophisticated support for smart charging is OCA’s (Open Charge Alliance) answer for a growing interest in this area. Energy cost fluctuates during the day. Also, the amount of energy available on different levels (charging station, building/parking, grid) changes according to the current consumption, production, and network capabilities.

Having that fact in mind we can use it to plan the charging process, buy cheaper energy for the end-user, and not overload the network. We need to know when energy is cheaper or the network load is too high. It’s out of the scope of OCPP, but once we have such information, we should inform the charging station how to apply it to finally reduce the cost of charging and limit network load.

OCPP 1.6 already supports smart charging. What is new, OCPP 2.0.1 is being open for new types of input having an impact on the charging process. Let’s start from a quick overview of OCPP 1.6’s support for smart charging and then move to things that are new in version 2.0.1.

Whole smart charging is based on charging profiles. A single profile describes time intervals with power/current limits, for instance, a profile can define that between 0:00 and 10:00 we can charge using 5kW, and between 10:00 and 0:00 maximum energy is limited to 2kW.

Profiles can be stacked and merged in order to build complex profiles. There are three types of charging profiles:

ChargePointMaxProfile - profile of whole charge point

TxDefaultProfile - default profile for a transaction (can be for whole charge point or for specific connector)

TxProfile - profile for a single transaction, deleted once a transaction is finished.

The second essential concept is a type of smart charging. There are three types of smart charging setup supported in version 1.6:

From a technical perspective, everything is covered by three OCPP API operations:

As it was mentioned earlier, 2.0.1 is open to new sources of information driving smart charging. Since now we can consume information from:

electric vehicles connected to charge point (through the ISO 15118)

Imagine a situation where there are some external indicators saying the energy our charge points transfer to EVs has to be limited. We can handle that on the CPO side, consuming the information and preparing an adequate charging profile being sent to the charging station over OCPP. But the 2.0.1 version supports direct integration between charge points and EMS. An extreme example of such integration can be a hospital with a lot of critical health-related systems consuming energy and with parking having charge points. It’s obvious that charging cars is less important than keeping the core hospital’s infrastructure running. This is an example in case of a bigger load, the energy management system should limit energy flowing to the charging stations. It can be done directly between the EMS and charging stations outside the OCPP. But such an approach introduces a problem. The CPO platform can be lost because the charging station behaves not the way it was requested by the system. OCPP 2.0.1 solves this problem by introducing a notification mechanism that informs CSMS (Charging Station Management System) about some external limitations. There are many cases that can be solved by support for direct smart charging inputs from an energy management system:

integration with Building Energy Management System

integration with Home Energy Management System

From a technical perspective, a new charging profile type (ChargingStationExternal) has been introduced. External signals changing the charging profiles should be stored as a charging profile of this type. Once an external charging profile has been added, the charging station has to notify CSMS and it does it using the new message - NotifyChargingLimitRequest.

The issue of support for ISO 15118 will be covered in the next paragraph, now let’s focus on the parts of ISO 15118 related to smart charging. Smart charging is nothing more than gathering information about the state of the network (including prices, load, etc.), processing the data, and steering the charging process. Standard ISO 15118 introduces another one source of information that can be processed in order to plan charging processes effectively. The source of information is an EV. One of the most important pieces of information when planning a charging process is the amount of energy the car wants to consume. There are many options to provide such information to the CSMS:

user can enter requested energy using a mobile app (delivered by the eMSP) and through the backend-to-backend integration send it to the CPO’s CSMS,

the charging station may send this data directly to the CSMS using a custom API

We could even use a new measurand introduced in OCPP 1.6 called SoC (State of charge of charging the vehicle in percentage). All those approaches have significant drawbacks. They assume the user's manual action, using a custom API or doing some approximations (when translating percent of battery already charged to the energy to be consumed without knowing the capacity of the battery). None of those solutions is good enough to become a standard. But ISO 15118 together with OCPP 2.0.1 covers this part of smart charging. ISO 15118 as a standard describing communication between an electric vehicle and a charging station specifies what type of information can be exchanged between those two parties. EV sends:

energy request (target, minimum and maximum)

charging parameters (current, power, and voltage)

discharging parameters (current and power)

Once the data is sent to the EVSE, it can be translated to the OCPP message and sent to CSMS which can use this input to prepare the charging schedule and send it back to the charging station (taking into account other inputs like price info, network load from DSO, etc.).

OCPP 2.0.1 introduces the message NotifyEVChargingNeedsRequest to share ISO 15118 based information with CSMS. It has four parameters describing charging details sent by EV:

Once CSMS prepares a charging profile for the current transaction, it sends it using SetChargingProfileRequest OCPP message. EVSE is proxying the information to the EV and as a last step, EVSE can notify CSMS about the charging schedule calculated by the EV using the NotifyEVChargingScheduleRequest OCPP message.

What is also worth mentioning OCPP 2.0.1 introduced ISO 15118 based renegotiation of the charging schedule. Renegotiation can be triggered by both sides - EV and CSMS. It’s useful in order to quickly react to the latest changes in the grid, no matter if it’s to reduce costs or unstress the network.

Very often the eMobility world is compared to the petrol industry. One of the most frequently compared areas is the transfer of energy from the station to the car. It’s said that we still have to wait years to bring the same user experience for the eMobility users as gasoline-based car users have today because of the time needed to charge the car. There is one improvement that has never been available for classic cars, but some charging stations and electric cars already have it. It’s Plug & Charge. In short, it’s a technology that allows users to start charging sessions without manual authorization. A user just needs to plug in the cable and without scanning the RFID token or using a mobile application car starts to drain energy from the station. Once charging is done, users can be automatically billed, also without entering payment details anywhere. Everything thanks to the PKI based solution introduced in the ISO 15118 and also covered by the OCPP 2.0.1.

Plug & Charge is built on a trust that is guaranteed by the Public Key Infrastructure. The most interesting part of it is how it replaces the need for human intervention when doing the authorization. The EV has the contract certificate stored (X.509 certificate). The certificate associates the end-user with the public key. Because the certificate is issued by a trusted Certificate Authority, the charging station is able to check it, and if it’s valid, the charging station believes that the user presented in the certificate is not fake. User is identified by the ID called E-Mobility Account Identifier (eMAID) stored in the contract certificate. eMAID is also known to the eMSP for billing purposes. Thanks to that, eMSP knows which user has to be charged for the transaction started automatically just by plugging the cable.

Two main parts of OCPP cooperating with ISO 15118 in order to provide Plug & Charge are:

Whole ISO 15118 is built upon Public Key Infrastructure. That’s why the separate component managing certificates has been introduced in order to open OCPP for integration with EVSE supporting ISO 15118. There is a set of OCPP messages including:

that are designed to manage certificates related to ISO 15118.

The second part of OCPP allowing to implement Plug & Charge is Authorization flow. AuthorizeRequest message contains (among other fields) information about the token used for authorization. This is a message used to send RFID token or a Central token in a remote transaction. There are multiple types of tokens supported in OCPP version 2.0.1 (more about it in the next paragraph), but one of them is called eMAID. eMAID is sent together with the data allowing to verify contract certificate (certificate and iso15118CertificateHashData).

OCPP 1.6 and previous versions were designed to support RFID-based authorization. Version 2.0.1 introduced a set of new authorization mechanisms, among them:

Central - used in for example in remote transactions

KeyCode - for authorization using PIN-code

It opens new possibilities for the development of user-friendly interfaces that may make charging easier and more accessible for the end-users.

OCPP 2.0.1 introduces significant changes that bring new opportunities for the whole eMobility world. In order to develop an efficient smart charging system or introduce Plug & Charge, we have to involve many parties, to mention only well-known ones like CPOs, eMSPs, and OEMs. The connection between the charging station and the backend system (CSMS) is a piece of a puzzle - linked with an upgrade of OCPP to the latest version. The decision has to be made wisely because it has many consequences, however, the features OCPP 2.0.1 provides can give CPO business a notable boost.

OCPP 2.0.1 introduced business-oriented features but also technical improvements.

OCPP migration

How to design and develop the eMobility Service Platform to manage interoperability?

After founding Solidstudio, Pawel was an originator in terms of pursuing expertise in eMobility. With the build-up of a solid knowledge-base on industry’s needs & wants, he now keeps a close eye on products’ development. He’s also hugely responsible for the business’ side and designs the business models for our products.

Paweł Małkowiak

When operating on the e-mobility market or considering becoming an eMobility Service Provider, the key is to identify and design the right flow. In this article, as a group of professionals developing such concepts, we want to share a verified methodology. This supports the setup of key components of major importance while developing a secure, stable, and functional eMobility Service Platform. We have already tested these principles and decided to share our insights, hoping some might find them helpful.

When deciding to operate in a booming e-mobility market, apart from doing extensive research - and taking the first necessary steps toward a feasibility study, it’s worth adopting some good, tested, and proven practices.

One of the efficient methods that prove that the solution will serve is 

. It’s the concept, widely used in IT, that helps organize the structure and language of software code matching the business domain. To develop the notable outcomes, there's Event Storming to offer a helping hand.

Note: Individual event names may differ (it's more of a naming issue), but the workflow’s general idea is always followed.

 , to generate a widely appreciated service, you need to set in the center the final user’s needs. Keep that in mind while Event Storming. The general idea is to think about each step that needs to happen seamlessly to the subsequent one. And how each must be secured to ensure the entire flow is stable and smooth. Before you start the discovery process, make sure all the participants are familiar with the methodology and necessary tools are provided. This will help develop a final roadmap for a proper eMobility Service Platform and guarantees a smooth flow of the workshop. You’ll need:

sticky notes in five various colors, it’s up to you which colors to choose

a large surface for modeling (e.g., A large sheet of paper taped to the wall works well)

step-by-step view of the process on an extra board for a clear overview of the Event Storming process

a lead person (facilitator) who will keep the entire process running smoothly

a group of people representing various domains, e.g., business, IT, marketing

The workshop can also be attended remotely. When the conditions do not allow participants to gather together in one place, the workshop can be conducted by distance. You can use a tool like miro in the digital variant - an online visual collaboration platform for teamwork that will solve the markers, post-its, and surface puzzle. The digital approach can also be seen as more environmentally friendly since we can create and edit each piece online without wasting paper. After all, the Event Storming outcomes must be digitalized, so the digital tool may be a good idea. Whichever variant you choose, each approach - remote or stationary - will be efficient.

Now briefly, let's clarify the roles of individual components.

Each color represents a different area. This is why diverse colors will help visually and logically picture particular subject areas. ‘True’ Event Storming purism 

 the colors for you, here we suggest the following:

Orange color - is used at the first step to define each event that should happen on the path to accomplishing the operation. Note: Events should always be described in the past tense, e.g., Invoice was generated, Charging has stopped.

Yellow color - used at the second stage of the storming to define ‘actors’ - people involved in an event or process. The goal is to recognize if external involvement is needed, e.g., Portal user, Support team member.

Purple color - being used at the third stage of storming, representing the system, external or internal, involved in the process. The objective is to highlight external involvement. e.g., Third-party API, Billing system.

Red color - represents the next step taken in the process - defining hot spots - indicating the lack of precise knowledge, doubts, or bullet points - a spot of disagreement between participants. The objective is to mark areas that need deeper insight, e.g., automatic price calculation, events order.

Green color - identifying opportunities - to specify areas where something works well and could be improved or space for fast growth. It can be a good support for the hotspot cards (red color), demonstrating a problem-solving approach, e.g., applying 

The lead person (a facilitator) guides participants through the process, keeps everything in order, and groups into aggregates.

The storming group - representatives of various areas: business, development, and marketing. The more diverse the group is, the outcome might be richer. Note: it’s not about the quantity, but rather the quality. And by quality, we mean the representation of different areas of business. The good idea is to make sure the most influential and knowledgeable people on the studied topic are invited. They are supposed to have some domain expertise (but seen from various perspectives). In this particular case, the idea is to meet IT requirements with business-related goals to provide an efficient, stable eMobility Service Platform.

Brainstorming: should take about 10-20% of the time, it is suggested to give participants ca. 15 minutes for individual work. Break: 5-10 minutes.

Verifying the ideas and backward walkthrough: about 60-80% of the time. You can make a short break about 5-10 min. between verifying ideas and backtracking events. Identifying Hotspots, commands, and actors: max 5-10% of the time.

Depending on the project’s size, in this particular case, working on eMobility Service Platform Functional Requirements, the Event Storming should take +/- one hour.

The actual storming phase starts when all needed components are set. The Lead (facilitator) should do a brief introduction to ensure all participants understand the following steps and outcomes. When it comes to brainstorming the eMSP, our outcome will be a service platform offering easy and secure access to the charging infrastructure. This is why the information board should be provided and handily arranged for the group.

In this phase, each participant defines events - all the steps that sequentially have to happen to complete the action. In our case, it will be to describe the user’s path to use a service - to charge an EV successfully.

Note: Participants should be familiar with the user’s profile - an EV owner who needs to charge the vehicle smoothly.

The Brainstorming starts with a brief individual defining. This should be a round of 15 min. Separately, all partakers are intended to distinguish the required steps. The aim here is not to specify each step, rather gather all interactions necessary for the flow.

After Brainstorming, the Lead (facilitator) asks each participant to present individual outcomes. This is the part when the group forms together with the roadmap. Identified steps can (and should) come up repeatedly. That’s ok. It shows common parts recognized individually. It also indicates that the group was selected properly and is familiar with the general idea of the flow that needs to be shaped. At this stage, because our team is diverse, each described actions may vary, depending on what area is represented. That’s perfectly fine.

Having formed the initial roadmap, the facilitator takes charge. With the storming group, the duty is to do the actual verification. A vital part of event storming, when developing an idea, is to begin from the end and backtrack event by event to check if no significant action was overlooked. The general scheme for backtracking is asking such questions:

What has happened before X?
Is X a consequence of Y?
Is there something more happening between X and Y?

Post-its in yellow, purple, red, and green color will be needed for the following steps.

Step three: identifying red spots, defining commands and actors

By analyzing and stepping back, the Lead (facilitator) with the group ask repetitive questions, like ‘are we sure this is all we need to complete the action?’, ‘is this step secured?’, ‘how will it be secured?’, ‘are there any other options available?’, ‘how do we want to handle the billing - externally or internally?’. The objective is to identify three areas:

Hotspots (here we suggest using red post-its - from a psychological point of view, red color is one of the most visible colors in the spectrum, has the ability to grab people’s attention instantly, hence is often used to warn of impending danger. For a good reason, the term ‘red flag’ is used to indicate warning signs)
When developing an idea, it’s good to indicate areas for improvement strongly. In our case, enhancing the emerging platform, to know what might be concerning. The sooner such areas are mapped out, the more time and resources will be saved when developing the project. If we identify a considerable number of such spots, it may also be a signal to consider engaging external agencies with specific domain expertise.

Commands & actors will need 2 extra post-it colors to mark commands like ‘execute payment,’ ‘issue invoice’, and actors, simply defining if the external or internal system is responsible for the command execution. This step helps decision making and provides extra insight into our roadmap. At this stage, we consider which parts of the process will be executed by our system and which will be on the side of e.g. CPO or payment system.

Having defined all requirements, the last step is to identify which area might be the biggest issue (causing the most problematic - interfere with the smooth flow of the overall manner, e.g., calculating the price, storing the CDR, executing the critical step when the process failed ‘no-show payment.’ At this point, again, each participant defines the area which they feel is a contentious one).

Note: Additionally, while identifying hotspots, commands, and actors, opportunities might be spotted. When we acknowledge we have the know-how or already witnessed similar issues and solved them, we can point out these opportunities, e.g., Areas where we can apply automation, or use a well-working, already tested solution (taking this step, you’ll need an extra post-it color).

When the Event Storming is done, it’s time to digitize the outcome. A well-conducted storming session should result in a roadmap, providing a sharp picture of what we want to achieve, obstacles we may encounter, and areas where we can recognize some opportunities.

Note: a key to reach any complete roadmap is to define at the beginning a clear goal. People tend to lose track when the scope is not specified enough. This helps to avoid the occurrence of insignificant events. This also explains why Event Storming needs a good Lead (facilitator). Keeping an eye on the storming’s smooth flow, focusing on a language, asking specific questions, detecting significant details and unclear aspects (e.g., marking hotspots), forming the main path and sidetracks.

The event is done, participants are tired but also satisfied after being creative, collaborative, and effective. After the storming, the domain architect steps in to discover and validate the subdomains.

How the British energy market handles unmetered energy supplies and how it powers eMobility?

20 OCTOBER 2020 • 7 MIN READ