Technical News Issue #80 | Spring 2018 | Page 5

NHP Technical News On this basis, NHP does not recommend this approach as a primary method to achieve load management. Where this solution may be appropriate would be as a back-up method to other solutions employed for the load management task. For example, if a cloud-based billing and authentication system is being used to perform load management, its performance will be compromised whenever communication between the EV charger and the cloud-based server performing the system control is lost. The weakest link in the system is the local telecommunications infrastructure – even the most reliable cellular networks in Australia are offline once or twice each year in some regions. An implementation of electrical load management in combination with cloud-based management could be set up such that the contactors would only open in the event that conditions indicating requirement for load shedding have been met, and the load has not actually been shed by the cloud-based system. The contactors shedding the load would be the last line of defence before the medium and large circuit breakers at the site started tripping, cutting both the EV charging loads and potentially other loads at the site. Local Smart Load Management To avoid negatively impacting the batteries in the vehicles, the load management system needs to communicate with the charger, which is in communication with the in-vehicle charge controller, and define a lower maximum charging rate. For example, if the charger is capable of delivering 7kW, the load management system might instruct it to reduce its peak allowable draw to 1 or 2 kW for a period of a couple of hours, while other loads in the building are high. This approach is similar to the electrical load management approach described above, in that the energy meters would read the real-time usage of energy in the building, and a small smart controller would then compute the available headroom for EV chargers. The key functional difference is that instead of taking chargers offline with a contactor (either individually or in groups), the smart controller communicates with the network of chargers via a gateway to command a reduced charging rate, or stop the charging process in a managed way. This solution is better for the vehicle batteries, and will allow for much better control over energy in the building. Importantly, this is a solution which is purely local in its execution. There is no requirement for an internet connection, or an ongoing cloud- based service subscription. It is also vendor agnostic, from the point of view of the EV charging equipment and upstream power distribution hardware involved. It should be noted that a smart system like this one cannot readily co-exist with a cloud-based authentication and billing system, or with an externally managed demand response system. Two or three different systems all trying to track and modify the charging behaviour in real-time, without coordinating with each other, will not work. System integrators and building automation contractors will be able to customise system behaviours for individual sites. There may be a desire to prioritise charging in certain parking locations, for example, or have an override control in place to start charging immediately if required. Cloud-Based Load Management (Incorporating billing, authentication, and reporting) Systems enabling EV chargers to communicate with cloud-based software have been developed around the world to enable user authentication and billing. These systems typically involve apps that can be downloaded to the smart phone of the EV owner, with the EV owner’s credit card details stored by the operator or an associated third party for billing purposes, much like Uber. Some of these are proprietary to specific types of charging equipment, or to specific energy companies, but increasingly we are seeing open systems which will support any EV charger supporting an up to date OCPP protocol. While the primary purpose of these systems is billing and authentication, the fact that these systems take a degree of control over the charging process means that making them co- exist with other smart load management systems is challenging, as noted above. The standard protocol that EV charging equipment uses is OCPP, which is primarily designed for cloud-based billing and authentication, but can also be used for load management. In cases where billing and authentication are not required (see ‘No Billing Systems/ Indirect Billing’ and ‘Billing for site access, not for the usage’), this protocol could be used locally over EtherNet to the charging equipment, either via CAT5 cable or WiFi. 5