energies

Article
Electric Vehicle Charging Strategy for Isolated
Systems with High Penetration of
Renewable Generation
Jean-Michel Clairand 1, * , Javier Rodríguez-García 2 and Carlos Álvarez-Bel 2
1 Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Agropecuarias, Universidad de las Américas-Ecuador,
Quito 170122, Ecuador
2 Institute for Energy Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain;
[email protected] (J.R.-G.); [email protected] (C.Á.-B.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +593-9-9586-0613




Received: 23 October 2018; Accepted: 12 November 2018; Published: 16 November 2018


Abstract: Inhabited islands depend primarily on fossil fuels for electricity generation and they also
present frequently a vehicle fleet, which result in a significant environmental problem. To address this,
several governments are investing in the integration of Renewable Energy Sources (RESs) and Electric
Vehicles (EVs), but the combined integration of them creates challenges to the operation of these
isolated grid systems. Thus, the aim of this paper is to propose an Electric Vehicle charging strategy
considering high penetration of RES. The methodology proposes taxing CO2 emissions based on high
pricing when the electricity is mostly generated by fossil fuels, and low pricing when there is a RES
power excess. The Smart charging methodology for EV optimizes the total costs. Nine scenarios with
different installed capacity of solar and wind power generation are evaluated and compared to cases
of uncoordinated charging. The methodology was simulated in the Galapagos Islands, which is an
archipelago of Ecuador, and recognized by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) as both a World Heritage site and a biosphere reserve. Simulations results
demonstrate that the EV aggregator could reduce costs: 7.9% for a case of 5 MW installed capacity
(wind and PV each), and 7% for a case of 10 MW installed (wind and PV each). Moreover, the use of
excess of RES power for EV charging will considerably reduce CO2 emissions.

Keywords: electric bus; electric motorcycle; electric vehicle; microgrid; smart grid; smart charging

1. Introduction
Climate change has pushed governments to create new energy policies. In particular, the energy
activities that emit the highest amounts of greenhouse gases, such as CO2 , are electricity generation
and transportation [1].
Hence, Renewable Energy Sources (RESs) emerge as new solutions to address this issue. They are
naturally replenished sources that do not pollute locally and have a very low carbon footprint.
The primary energy of these sources is transformed into secondary energy, such as electricity. However,
some of the more critical problems of the use of RES in this area are the generation uncertainties and
their high installation cost [2,3].
Various measures have been taken in several countries [4] to achieve the target of CO2 decrease.
One of these measures consists of taxing CO2 emissions to increase renewable energy production.
On the other side, Electric vehicles (EVs) seem to be a proper solution to reduce emissions in
transportation. This generates zero emissions while driving, and electricity production causes its
only footprint. However, a massive introduction to the grid could create negative impacts [5–8],

Energies 2018, 11, 3188; doi:10.3390/en11113188 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2018, 11, 3188 2 of 21

and create new challenges for the power systems [9,10]. In particular, a massive introduction of EVs in
distribution networks that have a high penetration of renewable electricity generation is even more
complicated because of some issues, such as impacts on the performance of parking lot operators [11],
power systems security [12], and planning of RES Sources [13]. Thus, in recent years, some researchers
have studied solutions for mitigating the adverse effects of EVs and also for creating new opportunities
for the grid.
The objectives of the works of EV integration in RES systems include: charging parking
lots management [14–16], unit commitment models for EV integration [12], microgrids’ energy
management [17,18], EV charging facilities as energy micro hubs [19], and the allocation of RES
and EV charging stations [20]. Fewer works have considered the operation of isolated grid systems
considering EV loads. In particular, isolated microgrids ought to keep the system voltage and frequency
within satisfactory ranges, but they can suffer significant variations from nominal operating conditions
because of the variations in the power output of solar and wind sources [21,22].
In some places in the world, it is essential to change network conditions because of environmental
situations, and the introduction of green sources are compulsory, such as the Galapagos Islands.
They are an archipelago of volcanic islands. Therefore, Galapagos is a protected area: the previous
Ecuadorean government has implemented some policies to protect them, especially because of the
growth of population and tourism. Moreover, electricity generation is mainly based on diesel fuel,
which results in significant environmental problems, and the transportation of fuels to the islands
creates another concern due to the risk of possible spills. Therefore, the government of Ecuador
decided to create the Program “Cero Combustibles Fósiles”, which consists of reducing gradually the
fuel consumption in the islands [23]. In that way, the government of Ecuador installed RES generation
in the islands, such as solar and wind, as part of the policies for changing the matrix of electricity [24].
The government also has the initiative of introducing EVs to replace internal combustion because of the
environmental conditions mentioned above [25], but this replacement does not include only traditional
cars to electric ones, but also motorcycles and buses. As far as the present authors know, no work has
been that studies the impact of different types of EVs in the grid operation. Hence, a methodology has
to be implemented to avoid grid problems from this new load.
The aim of this paper is to propose an EV charging strategy in isolated distribution systems,
such as Off-grid Microgrids, based on the optimization of the charging process and subject to the
grid constraints. Furthermore, the methodology gives rise to increasing the use of available RES and
resulting in a future increase of renewable energy production and reduction of CO2 emissions. A case
study of the Galapagos Islands is presented. This paper is an extension of an previous conference [26],
which has been significantly polished. The original contributions of the proposed methodology are
highlighted as follows:

• A strategy for EV charging in isolated electricity networks is proposed, considering a high presence
of both wind and solar generation.
• The EV aggregator optimizes the EV charging profile, through charging power rate modulation,
while respecting actual grid conditions, using renewable power excess that is not consumed by
other loads, and mitigating the RES power variations.
• The methodology has to consider the participation of a different kind of EVs such as electric cars,
motorcycles, and buses. Thus, the different energy requirements will be taken into account.

This paper is structured as follows: in Section 2, the related works are presented. The methodology
is described in Section 3. The case study is discussed in Section 4. The results are presented in Section 5.
Finally, Section 6 highlights the conclusions.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 3 of 21

2. Related Work
Related work of this paper is presented in two subsections. Firstly, an overview of the principal
works considering the EV integration in RES systems is presented. Then, some of the works that have
considered the impact of different types of EVs.

2.1. EV Integration in RES Systems

In [27], the coordinated integration of EVs and RES in power systems was studied based on a
stochastic security-constrained unit-commitment model. The objective was to minimize the expected
grid operation cost. The authors of [28] proposed an operational planning of EVs in a microgrid in
order to balance wind power and load fluctuations. The authors of [29] proposed an algorithm that
exploits the flexibility of EVs’ load to absorb the unforeseen fluctuations from the wind. However,
these works considered only wind generators. In [30], the operational planning of EVs and photovoltaic
(PV) units was presented. However, a similar shortcoming is present because only PV units are studied.
To address this, in [31], a smart charging algorithm is proposed that improves the power system
stability and robustness, using PV and wind. The authors of [32] proposed a probabilistic approach for
managing unavoidable uncertainties in loads, plug-in EVs and renewable generation, including PV
and Wind, based on the sizing of storage devices.
These works and others have studied the EV integration in RES systems that are connected to
a main grid. Just a few works have addressed the operation of EVs in isolated (or off-grid) systems.
For example, in [33], the optimal scheduling of distributed energy resources and smart management of
controllable loads, including EVs, in isolated microgrids is studied. The authors of [34] presented the
load frequency control of an isolated microgrid, based on a time-varying controller, and considering
EVs. In [35], a tool for the optimal dispatch of isolated microgrids is proposed, including charging
of EVs.
Although these works propose efficient solutions, they have mainly studied theoretical rather
than real case studies, using limited data.

2.2. Impact of Multiple EV Classes on the Grid

For the electric buses, in [36], the short-term forecasting for electric bus charging stations was
developed. The authors of [37] investigated the implementation of electric buses in a full transit
network, based on a real-time simulation. The authors of [38] proposed a power consumption model
of electric buses, based on fuzzy evaluation and wavelet neural network, and an optimization of the
bus company cost. In [39], a real-time optimal energy management system was performed, based on
a particle swarm optimization and dynamic programming. In [40], a transit system was studied to
work according to the electric grid capacity, achieving the required frequency and voltage. The authors
of [41] studied the optimal charging schedule of an electric bus charging station, minimizing the
charging costs. For the electric motorcycles, fewer significant works in the literature exist. In [42],
an energy consumption model of electric motorcycle was developed, using artificial neuro-fuzzy
inference systems; however, the impact on the grid was not developed. The authors of [43] presented
an implementation of a prototype of electric motorcycle to run in Cuenca, Ecuador; however, the travel
simulations of the city are very simple, and no impact in the grid was done.
As far as the present authors know, no work has studied the impact of both electric cars,
electric buses and electric motorcycles in power systems with RESs.

3. Methodology
Several policies have been created for protected areas to reduce CO2 emissions related to the
increase of both installed capacity of RES and EV penetration. However, System Operator (SO) may
suffer from operating problems if there is not both a proper management system of RES and an EV
smart charging plan.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 4 of 21

To address this issue, a smart charging strategy is presented. Thus, when EV users plug their
EV into the grid, they will allow EV aggregator modulating the power demanded during the EV
charging process, through intelligent chargers and smart meters, which are assumed to be installed.
Furthermore, it is assumed that a robust communication exists between the EVs and the EV aggregator,
such as the one presented in [44], and secure data communication, as per [45]. The EV aggregator will
manage all the EVs of the islands and it will communicate with the SO to develop a smart charging
process that will respect grid constraints and reduce users’ costs. The EV aggregator will be only
in charge of managing the EVs charge while the SO will be in charge of the operation of renewable
generation. It could be also considered that the EV aggregator will be in interaction with residential
customers’ aggregators, which will manage energy hubs as buildings [46]. The EV aggregator will
have to define a daily EV electricity cost curve when a new day starts, based on the forecasts. Then,
it will have to optimize the charging of the EV fleet, based on this electricity curve and considering
the needs of the EV users. The EV electricity cost, the problem formulation, and the EV charging
methodology are detailed next. Observe that various known conditions are assumed to be known by
the EV aggregator as input data. They could be predicted by estimation techniques such as presented
in some papers discussed previously, but designing these forecasts are not the main focus of the paper.

3.1. EV Electricity Cost

EVs represent a new load, which has to be taken into account in the daily operation. If the RES
penetration is higher than 30%, where inertia issues occur [21], it could be advantageous to charge
the EV when there is a high RES power available, which could result in excess of generation if the
residential demand (excluding EVs) is too low. Moreover, if there is not enough RES power available
and the residential load is high, it is crucial not to charge the EVs. Some work have already considered
consuming this excess of RES energy such as [47]. For this purpose, it might be beneficial to encourage
this load consumption through the charging of the EV batteries by the EV aggregator, based on
electricity pricing mechanisms. Hence, an electricity cost for EV users is proposed. The formulation
considers proposing lower costs when RES power is in excess of maximizing its utilization and
proposing higher costs when RES power is not available for minimizing electricity consumption from
diesel. Note that this charging mechanism is only proposed for EV charging purposes, while the
residential load (excluding EVs) has to respect its own tariff.
According to the characteristics of the pricing conditions of the case study, the daily specific
electricity prices have to be between a minimum and maximum values and considering a mean
value [48]. For this purpose, a daily EV specific electricity cost for charging EVs is proposed to
be between the minimum and maximum values, ymin and ymax , which have to be fixed by the EV
aggregator. It is also assumed that the EV specific electricity cost has a daily mean ym equal to the mean
proposed by the Ecuadorean regulator for the residential load. These conditions could be changed
depending on the local regulations.
For the calculation of the EV electricity cost, the difference of the residential load and RES generation
di f
Pk , including PV power PkPV and Wind Power PkW , is considered, for each time interval k in a day:

di f
Pk = PkL − PkPV − PkW ∀k ∈ τ. (1)

di f
In a day, the negative values of Pk represent a RES power excess. If the value is 0, it means
that RES power satisfies precisely the load. A positive value implies that there is not enough RES
power to satisfy load demand and it is necessary to generate the remaining power by diesel generation.
Therefore, it is considered that the charging mechanism for EV is built considering the trend of Pdi f
during a day. As per [49], pricing approaches have to be considered for the consumers, so the lower
costs will be when there is an RES power excess (negative values) and the most expensive ones when
the electricity has to be generated by diesel (positive values). For the case study, electricity prices
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 5 of 21

have to be positive. In order to consider the trend of Pdi f , but with only positive values, a system of
equations has to be solved.
A system of three equations with three unknown variables {a,b,c} has to be solved by the system
in order that the specific electricity cost curve follows the trend of Pdi f curve:

di f di f
a × min( Pk )2 + b × min( Pk ) + c = ymin ∀k ∈ τ, (2)

di f di f
a × max ( Pk )2 + b × max ( Pk ) + c = ymax ∀k ∈ τ, (3)
D D D D
∑ ( Pk ∑ Pk ∑ c = ∑ ym ∀k ∈ τ.
di f 2 di f
a× ) +b× + (4)
k =1 k =1 k =1 k =1

This system has to be solved by the EV aggregator with the forecast values before the beginning
of the new day. It is assumed that the forecast predictions are very reliable.
After obtaining the variables, the specific cost πk is obtained:

di f di f
πk = a × ( Pk )2 + b × Pk + c ∀k ∈ τ. (5)

Let’s suppose that PC M B

k , Pk and Pk are the vectors of decision variables for the charging power of
cars, motorcycles, and buses, which are defined based on the number of owners they have:
 C
Pk,1

 C
Pk,2 
PC
k = , (6)
 
 ... 
C
Pk,N C

M
 
Pk,1
 M
Pk,2 
PkM =  , (7)
 
 ... 
M
Pk,N M

B
 
Pk,1
 B
Pk,2 
PkB =  . (8)
 
 ... 
B
Pk,N B

The total load demanded from EV charging at interval k is defined as the sum of the demand of
the cars, motorcycles, and buses:
PkEV = PC M
k + Pk + Pk .
B
(9)

The total energy needed for charging all the EVs in a day (kWh) is defined:

D
E EV,tot = ∑ PkEV × ∆T ∀k ∈ τ. (10)
k =1

EV Daily costs correspond to the sum of all the costs of the charge process of all the EV types,
for all the time intervals k in a day:

D D
C= ∑ πk ×(PCk + PkM + PkB ) = ∑ πk × PkEV . (11)
k =1 k =1
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 6 of 21

The specific cost is obtained by changing the scale of the curve of Pdi f and adapting to a new
interval, as represented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Difference of residential load and RES power, and EV charging specific cost.

3.2. Problem Formulation

The model maximizes the RES energy excess consumed by EVs and minimizes the electricity
production from diesel, based on the charging of EVs:

D
min Pdi f = min( ∑ PkL − PkPV − PkW ). (12)
k =1

Moreover, the problem is equivalent of minimizing the daily cost of the EV charging:

D
min C = min( ∑ πk ×(PC M B
k + Pk + Pk )). (13)
k =1

The problem is subject to the following constraints:

• Supply-demand balance in the microgrid

The EV load has not to overpass the maximum grid capacity. It means that the sum of all the
demand, including EV and residential loads, and the losses might be lower than the power
balance of all the generation production, including solar, wind and diesel, for each time interval k,
expressed as:
PkPV + PkW + PkD ≥ PkL + PkEV + Pkloss ∀k ∈ T. (14)

• Maximum EV Charging Power Rate

Energies 2018, 11, 3188 7 of 21

The EV aggregator has to modulate the EV charging power rate between zero and the upper
bound, which corresponds to the maximum charging power that the charger from each kind of
EV e allows:
EV ∀ k ∈ τ.
0 < Pk,i,e < Pi,e (15)

• Daily EV user energy required

At the beginning of the charging, each EV user i specifies the energy needed the EV aggregator
has to respect:
k= D
∑
req
Ei,e = Pi,e,k ×∆T ∀k ∈ δi . (16)
k =1

In this methodology, minimum and maximum power constraints of generators are not taken into
account because only a small part of this power is considered to be demanded by EV charging so that
the other electric loads will demand the rest of power. Transmission network constraints were not
considered either because the grid is mainly composed of only a generation and distribution system.
The problem can be solved by a linear optimization for each EV.

3.3. EV Charging Mechanism

• At the end of Day 1, the system operator processes the data of RES Generation and Load Demand
from all the day.
• After processing the data, and including the EV charging that was not completed the day before,
the system operator has to create the specific electricity cost curve.
• Real-time information of the new cars plugged is sent to the EV aggregator each time interval,
which could be performed by smart meters installed in the customer facility. If new cars are
connected to the grid, the smart meter linked to them will have to send the information about the
charging, such as the energy required by the EV user.
Then, the cost optimization has to be performed, which will be carried out through the charging
power rate modulation between zero and the maximum EV charging power rate Pi,e EV . The time in

which the EV charging ends will also be known. The optimization process will determine the new
charging rate according to both the network constraints and the committed charging previously.
• EV aggregator will inform each time interval of the EV load to the SO to produce the required
diesel generation.

The flowchart of the methodology is illustrated in Figure 2.

Energies 2018, 11, 3188 8 of 21

Figure 2. Flowchart of the optimal EV charging for each interval in a day.

4. Case Study: Santa Cruz, the Galapagos Islands

To evaluate the proposed methodology, a case study was done of the Galapagos Islands in
Ecuador, which form an archipelago and whose islands are isolated from the main grid. The island of
Santa Cruz was selected for this study.
In this section, the distribution model that is going to be used in the methodology validation will be
described. For the first scenario, the actual conditions mentioned in [50] are presented. The distribution
system in Santa Cruz is formed by wind turbines, PV installations, and fuel generators, which are
described next.

4.1. Generation Capacity

The Ecuadorean government has recognized the Galapagos Islands as a national concern for
conservation and environmental management, establishing the Galapagos Zero Fossil Fuels program,
which consists of various measures and activities to mitigate degradation of habitat and ecological
impact [24,25]. Hence, the Ecuadorean government invested and installed wind turbines and
photovoltaic (PV) plants in Galapagos [51]. It is also expected that more RES generation is going to be
installed in the islands, but the exact capacity is uncertain. The characteristics are detailed next.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 9 of 21

4.1.1. Wind
There are three wind generators located in the Baltra Island, which are connected to the electric
grid of Santa Cruz Island through a 34.5 kV power line of 50 km long. The installed power of this wind
farm is 2.25 MW.

4.1.2. PV
There is a Photovoltaic plant located near Puerto Ayora, which is the main city on the Santa Cruz
Island. It has a total amount of 6006 PV panels, which is connected to Puerto Ayora substation through
a 13.8 kV power line, and has an installed power of 15 MWpeak (MWp).

4.1.3. Diesel
There are seven Caterpillar diesel generators with a total installed capacity of 5.26 MW [52].
Four Hyundai diesel generators have been installed recently with an installed capacity of 1.7 MW
each [52]. The total installed capacity is 12.06 MW.

4.2. Types of EVs

In the previous work presented in [53], some analyses of EV penetration were performed where
some assumptions of future trends in EVs were made. The novelty of the study lies in the study of
both regular electric cars, electric motorcycles and buses. In this paper, the term electric car will refer
to regular small size EV.

4.2.1. Electric Motorcycle

It is an EV with two or three wheels powered by electricity, through rechargeable batteries, such as
traditional EV. Typically, the battery is fabricated by lithium ion. Electric motorcycles can be charged
in ordinary wall outlets, and some models allow charging by electric vehicle supply equipment.
The electric motorcycles usually have lower energy capacity battery. Additionally, electric motorcycles
have comparable performances than gasoline-powered motorcycles, but they are less pollutant and
less noisy.

4.2.2. Electric Bus

It is an EV with four wheels powered by electricity. There are two principal kinds of electric buses:
non-autonomous and onboard stored electricity.
An external source of electricity powers non-autonomous electric buses, which could be by
two overhead electric wires, from a power line embedded in the ground, or by electric cable buried
under the pavement.
On-board stored electric buses are powered by a battery pack, with significant energy capacity.
The driving performances of electric buses are demonstrated to be similar than fuel buses. Furthermore,
since the battery has significant capacity, it could be beneficial to adopt vehicle-to-grid technology.
For this methodology, electric buses with battery packs are considered.

4.3. EV Input Variables

4.3.1. Values for the Daily EV Specific Costs

The minimum and maximum values, ymin and ymax , are selected based on the values given by the
Ecuadorean regulator Arconel, which are 0.05 $/kWh and 0.1 $/kWh, respectively. It is also proposed
to have a daily mean ym equal to the mean proposed by Arconel that is 0.078 $/kWh.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 10 of 21

4.3.2. Number of Vehicles from Each Type and Model Selected

In [25], there are 1326 total vehicles in Santa Cruz. Only the types of vehicles that could be
replaced by the ones mentioned above are considered in this study. The other types are smaller groups
or more difficult to replace by a current equivalent electric model. The quantity and main features of
each type are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. EV characteristics.

EV Type Motorcycle Bus Car

N 611 46 467
EV
Pi,e 1 kW 60 kW 6.6 kW
Bate 4 kWh 324 kWh 27 kWh
req
Ei,e 1.7 kWh 280 kWh 24 kWh
sti,e 16 h 30–20 h 30 12 h 00–22 h 00 05 h 00–12 h 00 & 22 h 00–02 h 00

The motorcycles in Galapagos require a speed up to 70 km/h to drive in the roads of the island
safely. Thus, the model S-4100 (S4100, Zelectricvehicle, Morgantown, WV, USA) is considered as
the most suitable equivalent model to replace the existing ones. Its relevant features are presented
in [54]. According to this, the maximum charging power rate is 1 kW. The charging time reaches up to
four hours.
Among buses, the BYD K9 model is the equivalent electric design that is considered in this study.
This model has a maximum charging power rate of 60 kW [55]. In Galapagos, road conditions are not
exceptional, so taxi owners commonly buy spacious cars. Therefore, the Kia Soul EV is considered as
the equivalent electric car in this case. This model has a maximum charging power rate of 6.6 kW [56].

4.3.3. Starting Time of Charge

On the Santa Cruz Island, motorcycle users are usually people that work in government or
tourism offices during the traditional Ecuadorian workday, which finishes between 4:00 p.m. and
8:00 p.m. Considering the trips home, it is estimated that motorcycle users will plug in their EVs
between 4:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m.
According to the local bus timetable of routes on the island, bus drivers work only at the beginning
and end of labor hours. For this reason, it is considered that half of the buses start their charging
between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., and the other half between 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. [25].
On the Santa Cruz Island, most of the car users are taxis drivers [25]. In this case, they usually
work all day transporting workers and tourists. The starting time of charging is considered later
than the others because they have to supply the needs of people that won’t take the buses. For this
reason, electric cars are considered to start their charging between 10:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m.. It is also
considered a starting charging time between 5:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. because of the transportation of
tourists to the airport.

4.3.4. Energy Required

The distances that are covered by the different vehicles were considered to have an estimation
of the energy required for each type of EV per day. Regarding the electric motorcycles, which are
equipped with a battery of 2.86 kWh, and, taking into account the existing road conditions, it is
assumed that they have an autonomy of 50 km. Furthermore, it is considered that motorcycle users
drive 30 km per day; as a result, the energy required per user is 1.7 kWh per day.
In the case of electric buses, the battery capacity of BYD K9 bus (K9, BYD, Shenzhen, China) is
324 kWh that corresponds with an autonomy of 250 km. The buses currently cover around 200 km per
day and the value of their autonomy could be a bit lower because their routes usually go through the
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 11 of 21

main roads on the island. Therefore, the energy required of each electric bus is estimated at 280 kWh
per day.
In the case of the electric cars, the Kia Soul EV (Soul EV, Kia, Seoul, South Korea) has an autonomy
of 180 km. The taxi drivers cover an average distance of 150 km per day and, taking into account
the road conditions, the energy required by each EV is around 24 kWh per day. This value is close to
27 kWh, but, as mentioned above, it is considered that there are two periods of charging every day.

4.3.5. Plug Duration

In this study, it is assumed that the Plug Duration for each EV i, Tτ,i , is twice as long as the
duration of charging at the maximum charging power rate TP,max,i , which is expressed in the following
equation. This assumption was made based on the behaviors of EV users [53]:
req
Ei,e
Tτ,i = 2× TP,max,i = 2× . (17)
EV
Pi,e

4.4. Residential Load

A daily load curve of a typical day for residential customers in the Santa Cruz island was selected
from the data provided by Elecgalápagos (local distributor). The residential load is presented in
Figure 3. The present RES generation of that day is also represented. In addition, it has been assumed
10% of electricity grid losses taking into account the information provided by Elecgalapagos.

Figure 3. Present daily Santa Cruz load and daily Renewable generation.

4.5. Implementation
In a day, it is considered D = 72 that is the number of time intervals per day, so the time intervals
last 20 min:
τ = {1, 2, ...D }. (18)

The plug duration γi is defined as the time between the plug of the EV i to the charging station
and the time of departure. In this case:
γi ⊆ τ. (19)

The charging time δi is defined as the duration in which their EVs are plugged to perform the
smart charging. If a user disconnects its EV before the charging time is finished, there will be no
guarantee that at least some energy has been transferred to the batteries. If everything goes well,
users will be able to unplug their EVs after the charging time when the interface shows the associated
message. In this sense:
δi ⊆ γi (20)
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 12 of 21

5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Scenarios Definition

As previously mentioned, the newly installed capacity of the RES generation in Santa Cruz is
uncertain. Thus, to assess the influence of the methodology for different capacities of both wind and
PV, nine scenarios are studied, which combine different installed capacities of PV (5, 7.5 and 10 MW)
and Wind (5, 7.5 and 10 MW). All the scenarios are resumed in Table 2, depending on the assumed
installed capacity of wind and solar. The present conditions are not taken into account because of the
actual low RES penetration.

Table 2. Installed capacity of PV and Wind for each scenario.

Scenario IC PV (MW) ICW (MW)

1 5 5
2 5 7.5
3 5 10
4 7.5 5
5 7.5 7.5
6 7.5 10
7 10 5
8 10 7.5
9 10 10

Firstly , to evaluate the daily operation, the simulations of the smart charging methodology are
compared to a case of uncoordinated charging, which consists of EV users starting their charging at a
maximum charging power rate immediately after they are plugged to the grid. For this evaluation,
two scenarios are selected with very different installed capacity, which correspond to the first scenario
(5 MW of PV and 5MW of Wind), and the ninth scenario (10 MW of PV and 10 MW of Wind).
The analysis of daily operations is performed.
Then, all the costs of the nine scenarios are studied to show the importance of proper management
of EV charging when there is a high presence of renewable electricity generation in the grid.
These scenarios are studied for several months from the data available from [13,26].

5.2. Daily Operation: Scenario 1

Scenario 1 corresponds to an installed capacity of 5 MW of Wind and 5 MW of PV. From the
simulations of the proposed methodology, the charging patterns of the smart charging for all the EVS
are represented in Figure 4, and the load patterns of the different types of EVs are compared.

Figure 4. Charging pattern from each type of EV, with smart charging, for Scenario 1.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 13 of 21

The energy required for charging electric motorcycles is very small compared with the energy for
the other kind of EVs. Buses are the EVs that consume the most energy, especially during the night,
when the RES power is not significantly available.
Figure 5 represents the different loads and the generation output. The EV Load is able to absorb a
large part of the RES energy, particularly during the day. Moreover, from 10:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.,
diesel generation is minimal.

Figure 5. Loads and Generation Profiles, with smart charging, for Scenario 1.

In Figure 6, the patterns for both Smart and Uncoordinated Charging are shown. Significant peaks
and valley periods occur in the Smart Charging pattern corresponding to the absence or surplus of
energy from RES.

Figure 6. Smart Charging and Uncoordinated Charging Patterns, for Scenario 1.

The excess power from RES is expressed:

(
PkW + PkPV − PkD , if PkW + PkPV > PkD ,
Pkexc,RES = (21)
0, otherwise.

The daily excess energy from RES is expressed:

D
Ekexc,RES = ∑ Pkexc,RES ×∆T. (22)
k =1
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 14 of 21

The excess power from RES consumed by EV is expressed:


EV
 Pk ,

 if 0 < PkEV < Pkexc,RES ,
Pkexc,EV = Pkexc,RES , if 0 < Pkexc,RES < P EV , (23)


0, otherwise.

The excess energy from RES consumed by EVs is expressed:

D
Ekexc,EV = ∑ Pkexc,EV ×∆T. (24)
k =1

Figure 7 presents the electricity that has to be produced by Diesel generators and the RES energy
excess consumed by EVs.

Figure 7. Diesel generation and RES power excess consumed by EVs for Scenario 1.

It was observed that, with the smart charging, the EVs consume more RES energy and less diesel
energy. Note also that the RES energy excess is not very significant.
Table 3 summarizes the energy consumed, total costs and specific costs both for uncoordinated
and smart charging for each type of EV. Smart Charging results in lower costs than Uncoordinated
Charging for all types of EVs. The most critical difference is for electric cars for which the Specific
Cost has a difference of 9.9% between uncoordinated and smart charging. The difference for all the EV
charging between uncoordinated and smart is 7.9%.

Table 3. Energy and Costs for each type of EV for Scenario 1.

EV Type Motorcycle Bus Car Total

E EV,tot(kWh) 1039 12,880 11,208 25,127
C unc ($) 91 983 862 1936
C coo ($) 87 918 777 1782
unc ($/MWh)
Ceq 87.6 76.3 76.9 77
coo ($/MWh)
Ceq 83.7 71.3 69.3 70.9

The ratio of RES energy excess consumed and EV ηexc,EV is expressed as:

Eexc,EV
η exc,EV = . (25)
E EV,tot
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 15 of 21

This relation demonstrates the RES excess energy that is consumed by EVs overall energy that
was supplied for EV charging.
Table 4 shows the total amount of Electricity generated by Diesel and the RES energy excess that
is consumed in charging EVs.
As can be seen, the Smart Charging of EVs involves 4.6% less electricity produced by Diesel and
23.9% more consumption of RES energy excess compared to uncoordinated charging. Furthermore,
the ratio of RES energy excess used for charging EV is 31.8% more significant for Smart Charging
than for Uncoordinated Charging. Note that the values of the ratios for the two kinds of charging are
relatively significant.

Table 4. Diesel Generation and RES power excess used for charging EV for Scenario 1.

Type of Charging Uncoordinated Smart

Diesel Energy (kWh) 39,505 37,766
Excess RES Used (kWh) 5532 7271
Ratio excess RES (%) 22 29

5.3. Scenario 9: Daily Operation

This scenario increased the same proportions of PV and Wind Generation, with an installed power
capacity of 10 MW capacity for both PV and Wind. The different patterns from generation and loads
are represented in Figure 8. The EV charging load is quite similar to that of Scenario 1, but as the RES
capacity is higher, RES energy excess that was not seen in reference scenario is available at specific
periods of the night. It can be seen that EV charging absorbs RES power peaks. However, since the RES
installed capacity is very high, there is a significant amount of RES energy that cannot be consumed.

Figure 8. Loads and Generation Profiles for Scenario 9, with smart charging.

In Figure 9, the Diesel generation and RES energy excess consumed by EVs are represented
both for smart and uncoordinated charging. As the RES power capacity increases, so do total Diesel
generation and RES energy excess consumed by EV.
Table 5 shows the total amount of Electricity generated by Diesel and the RES energy excess
consumed for charging EVs in Scenario 9. As in scenario 1, the costs and specific costs are lower with
smart charging than with uncoordinated charging, but the total difference drops (7% for the specific
cost) and the total costs and specific costs are more significant for smart charging between the reference
scenario and scenario 2. This finding is because the cheaper periods of electricity cannot be used for
charging EVs because there is no significant demand for charging at these periods.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 16 of 21

Figure 9. Diesel generation and RES power excess consumed by EVs for Scenario 9.

Table 5. Energy and Costs for each type of EV for Scenario 9.

EV Type Motorcycle Bus Car Total

E EV,tot(kWh) 1039 12,880 11,208 25,127
C unc (kWh) 86 937 888 1911
C coo ($) 83 909 797 1790
unc ($/MWh)
Ceq 90.2 72.7 79.2 76.1
coo ($/MWh)
Ceq 79.9 70.6 71.1 71.2

Table 6 shows the total amount of electricity generated by Diesel and the RES excess energy that is
consumed for charging EVs. The Smart Charging of EVs has 23.3% less electricity produced by Diesel
and 8.6% more consumption of the RES energy excess compared to uncoordinated charging.

Table 6. Diesel Generation and RES pwer excess used for charging EV for Scenario 9.

Type of Charging Uncoordinated Smart

Diesel Energy (kWh) 9019 7317
Excess RES Used (kWh) 18,679 20,382
Ratio excess RES (%) 74 81

5.4. Medium-Term Operation

RES generation presents fluctuations from one day to other, so different scenarios are evaluated
from the data available from July to November 2015, to evaluate the methodology in a longer period.
The results of the different parameters studied are represented in Table 7. It is observed that
the costs C are very similar in all cases, but they are relatively lower with a high presence of wind
generation. In particular, EV load corresponds more to periods when wind generation is high. Note also
that the excess of energy consumed by EVs presents fair values for the Scenario 6, which corresponds to
an installed capacity of 7.5 MW of both Wind and PV. The first scenarios result in low values of Eexc,EV
and the last scenarios in relatively high values of Eexc,EV , but considering high RES installed capacity.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 17 of 21

Table 7. Energy and Costs comparison between each scenario.

Scenario IC PV (MW) ICW (MW) Eexc,EV (MWh) E D (MWh) C (k$)

1 5 5 292 9700 281
2 5 7.5 662 7680 280
3 5 10 1260 5980 278
4 7.5 5 616 8850 284
5 7.5 7.5 945 7050 282
6 7.5 10 1460 5520 281
7 10 5 867 8310 285
8 10 7.5 1130 6680 284
9 10 10 1570 5270 283

5.5. Discussion
It was demonstrated that the excess of RES power, which results from the unbalance between
the load and generation could be adequately managed by charging the EVs. However, the installed
capacity of RES has to be appropriately planned because the EV load can not only consume a very
high amount of excess of RES power. Furthermore, for implementing the methodology, it has to be
considered the additional installation of local microgrid controllers, in order to avoid stability issues
due to the variability of the RES power.
However, this methodology presents several advantages and can be appropriately integrated into
similar microgrid systems.

6. Conclusions
An EV charging strategy was studied in this work to encourage RES integration in isolated
distribution systems, such as Off-grid Microgrids. The smart charging methodology for EV considered
the RES power availability, through cost optimization, which is based on EV charging power
modulation. This charging mechanism was simulated in Santa Cruz, which is a protected island
of Galapagos and works in off-grid mode. Different kinds of EVs that could be introduced in the
Galapagos Islands were considered in the methodology in the charging process.
The EV charging strategy was compared to cases of Uncoordinated Charging. It was observed
that the EV aggregator could reduce costs: 7.9% for a case of 5 MW installed capacity (wind and PV
each), 7% for a case of 10 MW installed (wind and PV each). In addition, it is observed an increase in
the use of RES excess energy by EV load, as well as a decrease of the Diesel generation, while respecting
grid conditions. Moreover, this will lead to a significant decrease of CO2 emissions, which could reach
up to 12,780 kg/day avoided in Scenario 9 [13], and thus mitigate contamination in the island.
Nine scenarios from different installed capacities of wind and PV were studied, where
two scenarios were illustrated for daily charging. The costs of the nine scenarios were evaluated
in the medium term. The increase of the RES installed capacity holds the EV aggregator specific costs
almost equal but leads to a decrease of the Diesel use and in an increase of the RES excess energy
consumed by EV.
The main limitation of this work lies in the significant amount of RES excess energy that cannot
be absorbed by EV with high RES capacity installation. In fact, EVs play a key role in the new power
systems, but they are not the only factor; for a better RES integration, it is necessary to complement with
residential load management strategies such as demand response and integration of energy storage.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.-M.C. and J.R.-G.; Data Curation, J.-M.C.; Formal Analysis, J.-M.C.;
Investigation, J.-M.C.; Methodology, J.-M.C. and J.R.-G.; Software, J.-M.C.; Supervision, J.R.-G. and C.Á.-B.;
Validation, J.R.-G. and C.Á.-B.; Writing—Original Draft and Editing, J.-M.C.; Writing—Review, J.R.-G. and C.Á.-B.
Funding: This research received no external funding. The APC was funded by Universidad de las Américas—Ecuador.
Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank the Ministry of Electricity and Renewable Energy of Ecuador
(MEER) and Elecgalapagos for providing important information for this work.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 18 of 21

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

EV Electric Vehicle
RES Renewable Energy Source
PV Photovoltaic
SO System Operator

Nomenclature
Indices
e EV type: B for bus, C for car, M for motorcycle
i EV index
k Time interval
Parameters
∆T Time between each time interval (h)
EV
Pi,e Maximum EV charging power rate for an EV i and type e (kW)
πk Specific Electricity cost at time interval k ($/kWh)
Bate Battery capacity of EV type e (kWh)
D Number of time intervals in a day
req
Ei,e Daily Energy required by EV i and type e (kWh)
IC PV Installed Capacity of PV (MW)
ICW Installed Capacity of Wind (MW)
NB Number of electric buses
NC Number of electric cars
NM Number of electric motorcycles
N EV Number of EVs
PkD Power of diesel generator at interval k (kW)
PkL Residential load excluding EV at interval k (kW)
PkW Wind generation power at interval k(kW)
Pkloss Power losses at interval k (kW)
PkPV PV generation power at interval k (kW)
sti,e Hour of plug of EV i and type e
Sets
δi Set of time intervals of charging duration of an EV i
γi Set of time intervals of plug duration of an EV i
τ Set of time intervals in a day
Variables
ηexc,RES Ratio of excess energy from RES cosnumed by EV (%)
C Total daily cost ($)
C coo Total daily cost for coordinated charging ($)
C un Total daily cost for uncoordinated charging ($)
Ceqcoo Specific cost for coordinated charging ($)
Cequn Specific cost for uncoordinated charging ($)
E D Total energy generated by Diesel (kWh)
E EV,tot Total energy needed for charging all the EVs in a day (kWh)
Eexc,EV Excess of energy from RES in a day that was used for charging EV (kWh)
Eexc,RES Excess of energy from RES in a day (kWh)
PkEV Total load demanded from EV charging at time interval k (kW)
Pkexc,EV Excess of power from RES at interval k that was consumed for charging EV (kW)
Pkexc,RES Excess of power from RES at interval k (kW)
Pk,i,e Power consumed by EV i by type e at time interval k (kW)
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 19 of 21

References
1. Labatt, S.; White, R.R. Carbon Finance; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2007.
2. Geng, Z.; Conejo, A.J.; Chen, Q.; Xia, Q.; Kang, C. Electricity production scheduling under uncertainty:
Max social welfare vs. min emission vs. max renewable production. Appl. Energy 2017, 193, 540–549.
[CrossRef]
3. Verbruggen, A.; Fischedick, M.; Moomaw, W.; Weir, T.; Nadaï, A.; Nilsson, L.J.; Nyboer, J.; Sathaye, J.
Renewable energy costs, potentials, barriers: Conceptual issues. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 850–861. [CrossRef]
4. Robalino-López, A.; Mena-Nieto, A.; García-Ramos, J.E. System dynamics modeling for renewable energy
and CO2 emissions: A case study of Ecuador. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2014, 20, 11–20. [CrossRef]
5. Clement-Nyns, K.; Haesen, E.; Driesen, J. The impact of Charging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a
residential distribution grid. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2010, 25, 371–380. [CrossRef]
6. Ahmadi, L.; Croiset, E.; Elkamel, A.; Douglas, P.L.; Unbangluang, W.; Entchev, E. Impact of PHEVs
penetration on Ontario’s electricity grid and environmental considerations. Energies 2012, 5, 5019–5037.
[CrossRef]
7. Humayd, A.S.; Bhattacharya, K. Design of Optimal Incentives for Smart Charging Considering
Utility-Customer Interactions and Distribution Systems Impact. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2017, 3053, 1–11.
[CrossRef]
8. De Oliveira-De Jesus, P.; Rios, M.; Ramos, G. Energy Loss Allocation in Smart Distribution Systems with
Electric Vehicle Integration. Energies 2018, 11, 1962. [CrossRef]
9. Guo, C.; Yang, J.; Yang, L. Planning of electric vehicle charging infrastructure for urban areas with tight land
supply. Energies 2018, 11, 2314. [CrossRef]
10. Kordkheili, R.A.; Pourmousavi, S.A.; Savaghebi, M.; Guerrero, J.M.; Nehrir, M.H. Assessing the potential of
plug-in electric vehicles in active distribution networks. Energies 2016, 9, 34. [CrossRef]
11. Shafie-Khah, M.; Siano, P.; Fitiwi, D.; Mahmoudi, N.; Catalão, J. An innovative two-level model for electric
vehicle parking lots in distribution systems with renewable energy. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2018, 9, 1506–1520.
[CrossRef]
12. An, K.; Song, K.B.; Hur, K. Incorporating charging/discharging strategy of electric vehicles into security-constrained
optimal power flow to support high renewable penetration. Energies 2017, 10, 729. [CrossRef]
13. Clairand, J.-M.; Arriaga, M.; Cañizares, C.A.; Álvarez-Bel, C. Power Generation Planning of Galapagos
Microgrid Considering Electric Vehicles and Induction Stoves. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2018. [CrossRef]
14. Amini, M.H.; Moghaddam, M.P.; Karabasoglu, O. Simultaneous allocation of electric vehicles’ parking
lots and distributed renewable resources in smart power distribution networks. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017,
28, 332–342. [CrossRef]
15. Guo, Y.; Xiong, J.; Xu, S.; Su, W. Two-Stage Economic Operation of Microgrid-Like Electric Vehicle Parking
Deck. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2016, 7, 1703–1712. [CrossRef]
16. Miceli, R.; Viola, F. Designing a sustainable university recharge area for electric vehicles: Technical and
economic analysis. Energies 2017, 10, 1604. [CrossRef]
17. Lu, X.; Zhou, K.; Yang, S. Multi-objective optimal dispatch of microgrid containing electric vehicles.
J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 165, 1572–1581. [CrossRef]
18. Ji, Z.; Huang, X.; Xu, C.; Sun, H. Accelerated model predictive control for electric vehicle integrated
microgrid energy management: A hybrid robust and stochastic approach. Energies 2016, 9, 973. [CrossRef]
19. Alharbi, W.; Member, S.; Bhattacharya, K.; Member, S. Electric Vehicle charging facility as a smart energy
microhub.pdf. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2017, 8, 616–628. [CrossRef]
20. Mozafar, M.R.; Moradi, M.H.; Amini, M.H. A simultaneous approach for optimal allocation of renewable
energy sources and electric vehicle charging stations in smart grids based on improved GA-PSO algorithm.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017, 32, 627–637. [CrossRef]
21. Delille, G.; François, B.; Malarange, G. Dynamic frequency control support by energy storage to reduce the
impact of wind and solar generation on isolated power system’s inertia. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2012,
3, 931–939. [CrossRef]
22. Han, H.; Li, L.; Wang, L.; Su, M.; Zhao, Y.; Guerrero, J.M. A novel decentralized economic operation in
islanded AC microgrids. Energies 2017, 10, 804.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 20 of 21

[CrossRef]
23. Vélez-Vega, V.; Cedeño-Gómez, M.; Almeida-Chinga, O. Energía Verde Para Galápagos. PROGRa.m.A LAS
Nac. UNIDAS PARA EL Desarro. 2016, p. 10. Available online: http://www.ec.undp.org/content/dam/
ecuador/docs/documentosproyectosambiente/pnud_ecREVISTAENERGIAVERDEPARAGALAPAGOS-
ilovepdf-compressed.pdf (accessed on 28 November 2017).
24. Ponce-Jara, M.; Castro, M.; Pelaez-Samaniego, M.; Espinoza-Abad, J.; Ruiz, E. Electricity sector in Ecuador:
An overview of the 2007–2017 decade. Energy Policy 2018, 113, 513–522. [CrossRef]
25. Consejo de Gobierno del Regimen Especial de Galapagos, Plan Galapagos. Technical Report. Available
online: http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/ecu166016.pdf (accessed on 15 November 2017).
26. Clairand, J.M.; Rodríguez-García, J.; Álvarez-Bel, C.; Pesantez-Sarmiento, P. A tariff system for electric
vehicle smart charging to increase renewable energy sources use. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE PES
Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America), Quito, Ecuador,
20–22 September 2017.
27. Khodayar, M.E.; Wu, L.; Shahidehpour, M. Hourly coordination of electric vehicle operation and volatile
wind power generation in SCUC. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2012, 3, 1271–1279. [CrossRef]
28. Yang, H.; Pan, H.; Luo, F.; Qiu, J.; Deng, Y.; Lai, M.; Dong, Z.Y. Operational Planning of Electric Vehicles for
Balancing Wind Power and Load Fluctuations in a Microgrid. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2017, 8, 592–604.
[CrossRef]
29. Bilh, A.; Naik, K.; El-shatshat, R. A Novel Online Charging Algorithm for Electric Vehicles Under Stochastic
Net-Load. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2018, 9, 1787–1799. [CrossRef]
30. Sabillon, C.; Franco, J.F.; Rider, M.J.; Romero, R. Electrical Power and Energy Systems Joint optimal
operation of photovoltaic units and electric vehicles in residential networks with storage systems: A dynamic
scheduling method. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2018, 103, 136–145. [CrossRef]
31. Ma, T.; Mohammed, O.A. Economic analysis of real-time large-scale pevs network power flow control
algorithm with the consideration of V2G services. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2014, 50, 4272–4280. [CrossRef]
32. Chiodo, E.; Fantauzzi, M.; Lauria, D.; Mottola, F. A Probabilistic Approach for the Optimal Sizing of Storage
Devices to Increase the Penetration of Plug-in Electric Vehicles in Direct Current Networks. Energies 2018, 11.
[CrossRef]
33. Alharbi, T.; Bhattacharya, K. Optimal Scheduling of Energy Resources and Management of Loads in
Isolated/Islanded Microgrids. Can. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2017, 40, 284–294.
34. Khooban, M.H.; Niknam, T.; Shasadeghi, M. Load Frequency Control in Microgrids Based on a Stochastic
Noninteger Controller. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2018, 9, 853–861. [CrossRef]
35. Guzzi, F.; Neves, D.; Silva, C.A. Integration of smart grid mechanisms on microgrids energy modelling.
Energy 2017, 129, 321–330. [CrossRef]
36. Zhang, X. Short-term load forecasting for electric bus charging stations based on fuzzy clustering and least
squares support vector machine optimized by Wolf pack algorithm. Energies 2018, 11, 1449. [CrossRef]
37. Mohamed, M.; Farag, H.; El-Taweel, N.; Ferguson, M. Simulation of electric buses on a full transit network:
Operational feasibility and grid impact analysis. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2017, 142, 163–175. [CrossRef]
38. Gao, Y.; Guo, S.; Ren, J.; Zao, Z.; Ehsan, A.; Zheng, Y. An Electric Bus Power Consumption Model and
Optimization of Charging Scheduling Concerning Multi-External Factors. Energies 2018, 11. [CrossRef]
39. Yang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Tian, J.; Zhang, S. Research on a plug-in hybrid electric bus energy management strategy
considering drivability. Energies 2018, 11, 2177. [CrossRef]
40. Agrawal, A.; Kumar, M.; Prajapati, D.K.; Singh, M.; Kumar, P. Smart public transit system using an
energy storage system and its coordination with a distribution grid. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2014,
15, 1622–1632. [CrossRef]
41. Leou, R.C.; Hung, J.J. Optimal charging schedule planning and economic analysis for electric bus charging
stations. Energies 2017, 10, 483. [CrossRef]
42. Sriwilai, A.; Pattaraprakorn, W. The Study on the Effect of Electric Car to Energy. In Proceedings of the 2016
13th International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and
Information Technology (ECTI-CON), Chiang Mai, Thailand, 28 June–1 July 2016; pp. 0–3.
43. Fernandez, P.E.; Coello, M. Implementation of electric motorcycle case of study: Cuenca-Ecuador.
In Proceedings of the 2017 Congreso Internacional de Innovacion y Tendencias en Ingenieria (CONIITI),
Bogota, Colombia, 4–6 October 2017; pp. 1–5.
Energies 2018, 11, 3188 21 of 21

44. Zhang, L.; Ma, H.; Shi, D.; Wang, P.; Cai, G.; Liu, X. Reliability Oriented Modeling and Analysis of Vehicular
Power Line Communication for Vehicle to Grid (V2G) Information Exchange System. IEEE Access 2017,
5, 12449–12457. [CrossRef]
45. Hoang, D.T.; Wang, P.; Niyato, D.; Hossain, E. Charging and discharging of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs)
in vehicle-to-grid (V2G) systems: A cyber insurance-based model. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 732–754, [CrossRef]
46. Roldán-Blay, C.; Escrivá-Escrivá, G.; Roldán-Porta, C.; Álvarez-Bel, C. An optimisation algorithm for
distributed energy resources management in micro-scale energy hubs. Energy 2017, 132, 126–135. [CrossRef]
47. Ekman, C.K. On the synergy between large electric vehicle fleet and high wind penetration—An analysis of
the Danish case. Renew. Energy 2011, 36, 546–553. [CrossRef]
48. ARCONEL. Pliego Tarifario Para Las Empresas Eléctricas. Technical Report. 2016. Available online:
http://www.regulacionelectrica.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2018/01/2018-01-11-Pliego-y-
Cargos-Tarifarios-del-SPEE-20182.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2017).
49. Picciariello, A.; Reneses, J.; Frias, P.; Söder, L. Distributed generation and distribution pricing: Why do we
need new tariff design methodologies? Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2015, 119, 370–376. [CrossRef]
50. Elecgalapagos. Parque Eólico Baltra. Technical Report. 2016. Available online: http://www.elecgalapagos.
com.ec/pdf2015/centrales.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2017).
51. Elecgalapagos. Proyectos. Available online: http://www.elecgalapagos.com.ec/proyectos (accessed on
15 February 2018).
52. Paz, C.; Anazco, D. Iluminando al Patrimonio Natural de la Humanidad. Technical Report, 2015.
Available online: http://www.elecgalapagos.com.ec/pdf2015/M09/Revistainstitucional.pdf (accessed on
28 November 2017).
53. Álvarez-Bel, C.; Pesantez-Sarmiento, P.; Rodriguez García, J.; Alcázar-Ortega, M.; Carbonell Carretero, J.;
Erazo-Almeida, P.; Morales Jadan, D.X.; Escrivá-Escrivá, G.; Carrillo-Díaz, A.; Piette, M.A.; et al. Análisis
para la implementación de redes inteligentes en Ecuador—Metodología de Previsión de la demanda basada en redes
inteligentes; Editorial Institucional UPV: Valencia, Spain, 2016; p. 287.
54. Zelectricvehicle. Z Electric Vehicle: The Performance and Value Leader in Electric Vehicles. 2018.
Available online: https://www.zelectricvehicle.com/ (accessed on 20 May 2018).
55. BYD. K9 Electric Transit Bus. 2018. Available online: http://en.byd.com/usa/bus/k9-electric-transit-bus/
(accessed on 20 May 2018).
56. Kia. Kia Soul EV. 2018. Available online: http://www.kia.com/es/modelos/soul-ev/descubrelo/ (accessed
on 20 May 2018).

c 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).