Technological requirements in e-bus deployment

Thematic Working Group 2

Technological requirements in e-bus deployment

Content List of abbreviations 3 1. Introduction 4 About eBussed 4 About the Thematic Working Group on Technological Requirements in E-Bus Deployment and about this Good Practice Report 6 2. Background for the topic 7 3. Overview of activities 9 4. Good practice, some stories to tell and lessons learned 11 Listing good practices 11 Regional differences, similarities and synthesis of findings 25 5. Recommendations and action plans 28 Good practices taken up by other partners for their Action Plans 29 6. Conclusions 30 Annex 1 Matrices for operational requirements and technical requirements derived from it

31

Authors Stephanie Keßler Markku Ikonen Joseph Piscopo Ivo Tartaglia Reinoud Dirksen Frans Bal Zsolt Palmai

Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, Germany Turku University of Applied Sciences, Finland Ministry for Gozo, Malta Province of Livorno, Italy Province of Utrecht, The Netherlands University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, The Netherlands South Transdanubian Regional Innovation Agency, Hungary

List of abbreviations DC Depot charging (usually plug-in) GP Good Practice IE Interreg Europe kW Kilowatt kWh Kilowatt-hour LP eBussed Lead Partner MPT Malta Public Transport MW Megawatt OC Opportunity charging (usually via pantograph) PP(no.) eBussed Project Partner PTO Public transport operator TCO Total cost of ownership TWG eBussed Thematic Working Group V1G Unidirectional controlled charging V2G Vehicle-to-grid bidirectional charging VC-VCCU Vector Controller Vehicle Charge Control Unit VHH Verkehrsbetrieb Hamburg-Holstein (public transport operator)

3

1. Introduction About eBussed Transitioning from a region with public transportation based on diesel buses to a region with e-bus fleets requires ample expertise in different fields. A wide range of themes must be covered to initiate and support e-bus development. The Interreg Europe eBussed project concentrates on the exchange of experience between partner regions at different stages of e-bus operation development, thereby serving regions struggling with this highly technical and fast-developing field. As no partner region has entirely settled their e-bus transitioning path, new ideas, solutions and technologies can still be introduced to their development plans regardless of their current e-bus status. eBussed supports the transition of European regions towards low carbon mobility and more efficient public transport. It promotes the uptake of e-buses in new regions and supports the expansion of existing e-fleets. eBussed project contributes to the Interreg Europe programme Specific objective 3.1 “Improving low-carbon economy policies” by encouraging regions to develop and deliver better policies related to the deployment of e-buses. The project also facilitates the integration of electricity production based on renewables and low carbon electrified public transport. Through new ideas and better policies, the project promotes both the demand and supply side of electricity from clean renewable sources and the subsequent transitioning towards a low carbon economy. eBussed engages regions from all directions with and without practical experience on e-buses. In addition to this and three other thematic good practice reports, the project will deliver six regional action plans and policy recommendations to be used in partner regions. The project increases capacities and knowledge among its partner regions via a multi-level exchange of experiences and cross-regional pollination of ideas to better support the transition towards fully electrified bus fleets and low carbon mobility.

The consortium that formed for eBussed comprises of the following partners: Turku University of Applied Sciences, FI (Lead Partner) Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, DE Ministry for Gozo, MT Province of Livorno, IT University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, NL Province of Utrecht, NL South Transdanubian Regional Innovation Agency, HU

4

Total no. of buses in public transport

No. of e-buses

First year of e-bus operation

260

6

2016

1.694

51

2014

17

-

-

Province of Livorno, Italy

1579

-

-

Province of Utrecht, The Netherlands

500

75

2017

2.182

20

2020

Partner region Turku, Finland Hamburg, Germany Gozo, Malta

South Transdanubia, Hungary

Table 1: Comparing the status quo in e-bus deployment among partner regions (2020)

The main idea in forming the project consortium was to find project partners at different stages of e-bus development to maximise the knowledge exchange potential between project partners. The benefits of having a consortium consisting of regions familiar with e-buses and regions with less experience on the topic is evident. As no single or one-sizefits-for-all solution is currently available for e-buses, knowledge exchange is extremely fruitful to all partners despite their different development stages. In addition, e-bus technologies, charging solutions and business models are in a constant flux of development, with many competing solutions and models currently available, and new, more advanced technologies and solutions continuously entering the market. Consequently, all regions benefit from the experiences gathered and shared before and during the project.

5

About the Thematic Working Group on Technological Requirements in E-bus Deployment and about this Good Practice Report The project utilized a thematic approach based on four key issues recognized in previous studies on the subject: 1) drivers and barriers (i.e. total cost of ownership, noise/emission reduction, upfront costs, scalability, flexibility), 2) technological aspects (i.e. busses, batteries, data collection, electricity production based on renewable energy sources, grid requirements), 3) user interface (i.e. driver education and experiences, passenger perceptions, uncertainty of drivers), and 4) business models and procurement. Correspondingly, four thematic working groups had been set up to develop the regions’ expertise while taking into consideration the regional context. In addition, the necessary interplay between the sub-topics (i.e. technological, geographical, societal, contextual factors and policy level drivers) has been explored.

This report summarises the work done by Thematic Working Group 2 (TWG2) on technological requirements in e-bus deployment. It further analyses the various good practices collected by project partners with a reference to technological aspects. The methodological approach taken is described in more detail in chapter 3. This report takes policy learning one step further and sheds light on regional similarities and differences in this field of good practice (chapter 4.2).

The purpose of this report, which is an official project deliverable, is to provide input to the regional action plan development. The target groups are stakeholders of the eBussed partner regions as well as decision-makers throughout Europe who are interested in learning more about the transition from diesel-fuelled buses to e-buses. Thus, it is supposed to be easy to read for regional stakeholders and to inspire others to take up good practices in the field of technological requirements.

6

2. Background for the topic By technological requirement, we mean everything related to the technology needed for the operation of electrical vehicles in public transport, i.e. the vehicles, IT infrastructure, data collection, charging infrastructure and technology, operation management, depot architecture, grid requirements, electricity production etc. These requirements can be highly individual depending on regional characteristics, but at the same time, there is ample opportunity for standardisation (and need for it too). Operators require interoperability of new technology to be independent of manufacturers (e.g. software solutions for smart charging need to work with any type of electric bus).

As e-buses and charging infrastructure can still be considered fairly new technological developments, it is natural that development is dynamic with innovations arriving on the market frequently. Consequently, standardisation is a big issue, both for independence from manufacturers as well as lower market prices. Technological standards facilitate procurement as buyers can refer to the standards in their technical specifications.

Standards are needed for many items, e.g. charging plugs, vehicle components and communication protocols.

Many of the technological requirements are a consequence of operational requirements.

One example is the decision for or against opportunity charging with pantographs. If a transport operator runs bus tours (covering several lines, e.g. driving from A to B on line no. 5, going on from B to C on line no. 27 and then back to A) rather than individual lines (driving from A to B and back), it seldom makes sense to implement opportunity charging as the tour-concept needs more flexibility.

Moreover, operation procedures are changing during the transition from diesel to fully electrified bus fleets. The depth of integration of systems (charging management, operation planning) is also a parameter that influences technological requirements.

In our thematic working group, we have looked at operational requirements in the different partner regions. They can be driven by climate or topography, or they can be historically grown too. In chapter 3 we describe how various operational aspects entail technological requirements.

In the case of the inverted pantograph (from up to down), the interface between the bus and the charging system is critical in terms of reliable charging. When the charging system using the inverted pantograph is not in use, the pantograph is located at its uppermost position. This is the case also right before the launch of the charging process. This means that no part of the charging system touches any part of the bus. In other words, the 7

pantograph does not have a conductive connection with the bus. As a consequence, the signal for the launch of charging must be given to the pantograph wirelessly. Conductive connection is established as late as when the pantograph has come down.

There are several principles to select from for the wireless launch of charging. One of them is based on infrared technology. The experience has shown that positioning the bus under the pantograph must be precise for the infrared to react. Being able to stop the bus at the very correct position requires concentration and causes stress for the drivers. As a result of this, it must be emphasized that the most reliable wireless system available should be selected and standardized for the communication method between the bus and charger.

This is very essential in terms of reliable charging and compatibility between different buses and chargers.

The young age of the technologies involved in e-bus deployment places the public transport operator at risk of a kind of technological lock-in. By this, we mean that if a transport operator decides on a specific charging strategy (e.g. opportunity charging by pantograph), this will entail investments (procuring vehicles with a suitable batterie size, procuring and setting up charging infrastructure etc.). In case of technological innovations entering the market, the switching costs may be very high, and the transport operator may decide to stick to the older/other technology. Another example of this kind of lock-in is hydrogen.

To date, there is a lot of uncertainty whether and how hydrogen will be used for energy storage in the future and what role this technology will play for electromobility. Hence, public transport operators strive to make decisions for one or the other technology, but at the same time leave options for other technologies too, in case they become more relevant in the future.

8

3. Overview of activities The TWG2 assignment was to gather information on operational and technical requirements, study how these are connected and draw lessons learned. This has been done in cooperation with the stakeholders. The goal was to get a clear overview of which good practices there are.

In a first step, each partner provided input to a matrix of operational and technological requirements (see annex 1). This can be considered as a warm-up and brainstorming exercise as we did not pursue matrix in our further TWG2 work.

Next, an Interregional Learning Event for stakeholders has been organised and hosted

by PP2 as coordinator of this working group. The online event took place on 20 January 2021 from 9-12. More than 40 stakeholders from seven different countries participated in this interactive event. The documentation of all sessions (keynote speeches, workshop, panel discussion) is available in the eBussed library. As a contribution to the Interregional Learning Event PP2 (City of Hamburg) prepared a video in which they showcased one of the bus depots of local public transport operator VHH which was their first to host electric buses and the corresponding charging infrastructure. They interviewed bus drivers and the CEO of the (city-owned) company, Toralf Müller, on the topic of transition to e-buses. This video can be viewed from the eBussed library too. The results of the Interregional Learning Event are incorporated in chapter 4.2 and 4.3.

9

10

4. Good practice, some stories to tell and lessons learned Good practice documentation was a task common to all TWGs. We have tried to relate all Good Practices (GP) to the specific themes of the working groups. This reference has been integrated into the coding.

All partners prepared GP forms, the template of which has been jointly prepared based on the IE Programme form, with further space for investigating a number of particular aspects relevant to the experience transfer process. In addition, each GP form is supported by one or two slides to facilitate grasping its main features for easy exchange with the stakeholders of the partner regions.

What follows here is an outline of each documented GP, classified by the partners.

4.1. Listing good practices Turku On-duty service to report charging problems In Turku, the maintenance and repair of the two opportunity charging devices (300 kW each) with inverted pantographs (from up to down), is the responsibility of the city-owned company Turku Energia Ltd. The same company takes also care of the operation of the traffic lights in the city. For this purpose, there is a 24/7 operating on-duty service to solve the traffic light problems immediately in case of a malfunction.

The fault reporting of the e-bus recharging devices was connected to the existing on-duty system. The bus driver can call the already existing emergency number at any hour, and the repair personnel is on the way immediately. This has proven to shorten the downtime of the charging devices significantly, making the e-bus operation more reliable.

In addition to the on-duty service, Turku Energia Ltd is also responsible for the maintenance of the electric bus charging equipment. The company’s technicians were trained by the charger manufacturer for the maintenance and service of the chargers. The persons in charge of the company’s traffic light on-call service were selected as the group to be trained. The group handles traffic light fault situations and is also able to take care of charging devices. The operating model minimized the response time in problem cases.

When a malfunction occurs, the scene is usually reached within half an hour.

11

From the cost-effectiveness point of view, it is important to find a partner to take care of the emergency service. If an already existing on-duty system can be found, the on-duty costs do not become so high. Especially for non-depot charging buses, it is important to ensure the reliability and the proper functioning of the charging equipment.

Indicator for completion of charging The e-bus no. 35 is on its way from Turku market square to the airport. The distance is about 13 km and the expected driving time will be about 20 min. There is an elevation increase by about 50 m along the line, so the bus motor has to give enough power to handle the slight uphill gradient. The bus is about half-full, and the passengers seem to be quite satisfied with the ride.

The bus reaches the final destination, the bus stop in front of the airport terminal. At the same spot, there is also the opportunity charging device with an inverted pantograph. The driver carefully drives the last meters to make sure that the bus is positioned correctly under the recharging pole, both sideways and longitudinally. He opens the doors and lets the passengers go out. At the same time, he pushes the charging button and looks at the rear-view mirror located on a pole by the terminal building, to make sure that the pantograph is coming down. This seems to be the case. The driver hears the knock when the pantograph contactors touch the rails on top of the bus. At the same time, also a slight jerk can be experienced. The charging power meter needle begins climbing up and stops at a little below 300 kW. Everything is going as planned.

New passengers are gradually climbing in, and the state of charge percentage gauge is approaching the value of 80 %, which has been set as the completion point of the stateof-charge, to extend the battery lifespan. When the 80 % charge level is reached, the driver closes the doors, depresses the brake pedal and pushes the drive button on the direction selection panel. He releases the brake pedal, and the bus slightly jerked forward but stopped. The driver pushed the accelerator, and a loud crash and a significant jerk were felt. The driver switched to neutral and applied the parking brake. Then he looked at the rear-view mirror for observing the actions of the pantograph and saw something he would not have liked to see: the pantograph had been down when driving off, and now its rails were bent and caught underneath the contact rails on the bus roof. This should not have been possible to happen. The system was designed so that the drive gear would not engage if the pantograph is in the down position. However, this had happened.

Intensive thinking was devoted to preventing this from happening again. Finally, the solution was selected from a few options. It was a traffic light type indicator, located below the rear-view mirror on the pole by the terminal building. The purpose of this is to show the 12

driver when it is OK to drive off. The electrical connection of the traffic light includes a sensor that mechanically senses when the pantograph is at the uppermost position. As late as when this sensor gives the signal needed, the traffic-light will turn from red to green.

Public operator testing and monitoring platform Location: Turku, Finland Short description: The city has incorporated its own municipal enterprise. The company serves as a test platform where new functions can be tested, and experience gained in operating different vehicles.

Objectives: Under the ownership of the city, new technologies can be tried, both in terms of vehicles and information systems. The company may be required to do some experimentation, as was done with the use of electric buses.

Added value: Financial benefits from own experiences, cost savings in tenders, easy test new systems or functions.

Transferability: Suitable for transferring to other locations where is still Municipal public transport, especially if it is intended to tender for transport to private operators.

Hamburg Implementation of data-driven processes Location: Hamburg, Germany Short description: E-bus operations require the management of new parameters, such as battery range or charging time. Therefore, data-driven processes become increasingly important for larger e-bus fleets. Depending on the size of e-bus fleets, different extends of digitalization are required, varying from a charging management system to a complete depot management system.

Objectives: To enable data acquisition from e-buses and enable analyses. Further, to implement data monitoring processes to assess the efficiency of e-bus operation. This might require a complete re-design of existing IT infrastructure and processes. It has to be agreed with the manufacturers, which data will be provided to the PTOs and in which way.

13

Added value: The PTO benefits from an increased level of control and insight into its e-bus operation. Monitoring will identify the potential for cost reduction, by increasing the efficiency of operations, identifying technical defects and providing a data baseline for various analyses, during the pilot phase and regular e-bus operation.

Transferability: The practice contains valuable lessons learned for PTOs with a low degree of digitalization. The implementation of a similar practice depends very much on the specific situation. It can range from small modifications to a complete implementation or development of new IT systems.

Depot charging vs. opportunity charging – careful assessment of relevant factors Location: Hamburg, Germany Short description: Careful assessment of several individual factors influencing the decision for or against a certain charging strategy by the PTO or public authority, e.g.

- Operational flexibility - Price for infrastructure - Impact on bus drivers - Distances driven - Availability of public space (for building opportunity chargers) - Limitations in the built environment (e.g. low clearance bridges, weight restrictions on old bridges - Acceptance by public All stakeholders involved in the decision-making need to answer many questions in order to find their individual best solution.

Objectives: To identify the best charging strategy (and charging technology) for your region when implementing e-buses, taking into account relevant factors prevailing in your region.

Added value: Saving money and gaining confidence in deciding on one or the other charging strategy.

Transferability: The good practice wants to make potential followers more sensitive to relevant aspects; however, they need to provide their individual answers to the questions.

14

Automated pre-conditioning of e-buses Location: Hamburg, Germany Short description: Pre-conditioning of e-buses uses grid energy for heating or cooling the interior and the battery pack while still connected to the charging point at the depot.A software interface to the charger has been tested that starts the pre-conditioning process automatically. To achieve pre-conditioning, the buses must be able to start this process individually. This should be specified in the purchasing contract. For fully automated pre-conditioning the dispositioning system determines the departure time and relays this via the backend infrastructure charging system to the bus. Using the charging backend allows for an additional optimization step: Information from the dispositioning system can be used to decide which e-bus needs to be charged at what time with what power.

Objectives: Providing optimal operation conditions for the battery and starting a tour with a full battery and warmed up or cooled down bus interior to increase range.

Added value: The number of e-buses charged at the same time can be minimized, decreasing the maximum power required for the depot and allowing for a smaller transformer station.

Transferability: There are different ways in which pre-conditioning can be done. From manually, using a timer to fully integrated implementing an IT solution. The decision depends largely on available money, the number of e-buses operated and generated benefit (more benefit for larger fleets). Regions that want to apply pre-conditioning do not necessarily need to go for an integrated solution but can take a manual approach.

Optimizing charging infrastructure according to available space Location: Hamburg, Germany Short description: Rethink the bus depot layout to make it e-bus compatible. Due to restricted space, the plug-in charging infrastructure has been placed overhead. The cables can be pulled from above to charge the e-buses, leaving more space for a larger number of buses to be parked.

Objectives: When modifying bus depots to fit the requirements of e-mobility, space is often a problem. Firstly, a higher number of e-buses is needed to provide the same transporta-

15

tion services due to the lower range of e-buses. Secondly, charging infrastructure requires additional space.

Added value: Identify or develop a layout that allows for sufficient space for e-buses and charging infrastructure. The power modules of the charging infrastructure are located in a centralized wall structure. This structure is placed between two areas of parking to function as a barrier in the event of a fire.

Transferability:This practice can serve as inspiration to other PTOs in other regions when planning charging infrastructure for bus depots. The exact implementation of any charging infrastructure will depend on case-specific considerations and decisions (number of e-buses, space availability, e-bus technology used, preferred charging strategy, budget etc.).

Gozo Logbook in e-bus for monitoring of trip and driver feedback In 2019, Malta Public Transport (MPT) in conjunction with Transport Malta launched the VERO 9 e-bus by bus manufacturer TAM-Europe in Malta. This was the first fully-electric bus to be operated in Malta, and this project aimed to assess the efficiency and adaptability of the bus to the Maltese roads, which are characterised by their hilly terrain and frequent stops. To assess the performance of the bus, all the operation characteristics needed to be provided.

A logbook was created to keep track of the performance of the electric bus. This logbook enabled MPT to monitor the operation of all the trips done. The performance measures included route information, the operation time, distance travelled, and consumption of charge (charge initial and charge final) for each trip. In this logbook, the drivers could write their feedback on the driving experience of the electric bus. This feedback included any issues encountered during the trip such as hard suspension, turning and hand-brake issues. This logbook enabled MPT to compare the performance of the electric bus on different routes and during different times of the day. This was necessary to assess the ability of the bus to operate on certain routes under certain conditions (like traffic and high temperatures).

The data collected from this logbook during the pilot project was very useful for MPT to make informed decisions for the future since there are plans for the electrification of the public transport fleet in the future

Pre-testing of e-bus as training for drivers and technical staff prior to the launch of the e-bus pilot project The pilot project using the VERO 9 e-bus by bus manufacturer TAM-Europe was the first time that an electric bus was tested in the Maltese islands. The driving technique, operational characteristics and problem-solving techniques of electric buses were still new to the transport operator staff. The pre-testing served as training for the staff to familiarise themselves with electric buses.

Part of the training for drivers who were going to drive the electric bus during the electric bus pilot project involved driving the bus on a test route to get familiar with the bus before boarding any passengers. This can be considered as a Good Practice with regards to Health & Safety. Following the pre-testing, it was easier to identify the performance of the bus on certain uphill roads which were more challenging. This helped in choosing the routes that the electric bus would be operated on. The pre-testing also helped the technical staff to identify any common issues encountered during the pre-testing phase. In case of any technical failures, the supplier of the bus was available to assist the technicians to resolve these errors. In case of damaged components, the supplier provided the necessary spare parts and guided the technicians on how they should be replaced.

The pre-testing served as training on electric buses for the drivers and technical staff. It also served to determine the ability of the bus to perform well on certain roads, before operating on that road with passengers.

Livorno Transport public service usability improved (P.E.R.L.A. project – component 2 MICROLOTTO) Location: Livorno, Italy Short description: Expanding local public transport, with particular attention to people with reduced mobility; improving the accessibility of coastal areas and roads of major tourist interest; defining a system of routes for greater usability of the territory but protecting the environment; developing and implementing an App for disseminating services to citizens and tourists.

17

Objectives: - Improve the fruition of heritage, even in peripheral and island areas (difficult to connect). With Tuscany being full of scenic beauties that are distributed throughout the whole territory - Mitigate the impact of seasonal tourism - Introduce “experiential tourism” which enhances the journey and not just the destination Added value: Improved pedestrian/bike accessibility and increased use of electric public transport connecting railways stations, hotels, camping sites, beaches, parking areas and discotheques (night shuttle services); the preservation of the natural environment and the quality of life of citizens and tourists.

Transferability: The practice is transferable without the need for any particular adaptation to other regional contexts where similar demands are being expressed. No particular conditions are being noted.

Improving urban mobility through self-driving vehicle Short description: Developing solutions for the mobility of the first and last mile - people and goods Location: Merano, Italy Objectives: The objectives were to test possible transport services based on the use of the driverless electric bus, to set one of the strategies to introduce innovative modalities of public transport, complementary to other initiatives more related to private transport means and position the product/service within the urban mobility offer in a correct manner.

Added value: Verified driverless technology (and the vehicle in general) as a result of the test drive. This experiment has been the 1st Italian Open-Road Test.

- Positive impact on the Smart Road decrees, to prepare for a legislative acceptance of the driverless transport systems in areas open to the public.

- Contribution to larger availability of municipal mobility “on-demand”.

- Another added value of the shuttle consists in the smaller lanes it needs and the possibility to travel in shared spaces with pedestrians and cyclists.

18

Transferability: The test drive is easily replicable given similar conditions and arrangements (GPS support, adequate information, obtaining the necessary licences and permits to operate driverless transport in an urban area).

Utrecht Pantograph up or down Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands Short description: In The Netherlands, two systems of charging are being used: pantograph up (pantograph on the roof of the vehicle) and pantograph down (pantograph mounted on charging pole) Objectives: Although both systems are reliable, a slight preference has been given to pantograph up. The main reason is the fact that a pantograph up system uses a more elegant and less solid charging pole. This is relevant for urban environment integration.

Innovation goes on however and pantograph down poles become more elegant as well. A failure of a pantograph up system influences just one bus, a failure of a pantograph down system affects several buses.

Added value: Taking into account the environmental integration, the choice between both systems can be relevant, although the final decision should be made by the public transport company.

Transferability: Useful GP when solid charging bus poles are an issue according to environmental integration and operational reliability is an item.

Peak shaving, smart charging, bidirectional charging This good practice zooms in on a possible new strategy for cost reduction, lowering CO2 emissions and reducing net grid capacity. Instead of simply charging e-buses, it is interesting to consider if they can be charged when electricity prices are low, e.g. during the night and when there is an excess availability of grid capacity. In addition, vehicle-to-grid (de) charging can be used if demand is very high and prices are also high.

To achieve peak shaving, V1G and V2G, i.e. optimal charging of e-buses a smart connection between the e-buses and the grid is compulsory. V1G enables (price) adjusted 19

rates of charging, V2G has the extra energy trade via the battery pack. The 37 e-buses at the Qbuzz bus depot in Dordrecht (NL) fulfil all the needed technical requirements: They have the right VC-VCCU already built in, and the battery management system needs no upgrade to switch from V1G to V2G. The V2G-charge units to connect the e-bus to the grid are much more expensive compared to V1G ones. With both solutions lower energy costs are achieved; namely, V1G reduces costs per kWh almost by half, V2G slightly more.

In 2020 the extra revenue generated by trading the energy via V2G did not (yet) cover the upgrade cost compared to the V1G infrastructure.

With V2G the benefits of V1G systems exceed in terms of balancing the grid, reducing costs and emissions. In addition, the case study shows that a V2G upgrade does contribute just moderately to the battery pack degradation: After 8 years there is a reduction of a few per cent compared to V1G. But the extra degradation of the battery pack due to V2G (dis)charging had no impact on the e-bus operations.

This is no issue for the operator. With an operational life of 8 to 9 years, the e-bus has a shorter operational service life than the utilized battery pack. What is more, operators ‘buy’ kWh performance for 10 years in a performance-based agreement fashion from manufactures. In financial terms, this results in a depreciation of just a few % p.a.

Peak shaving via V2G is currently difficult while there is no guarantee that the e-buses are at the right time at the depot. However, energy storage at the depot enables this and provides a sustainable opportunity for re-using old battery packs.

New bus depot Westraven Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands Short description: A bus depot for 160 electric buses is situated next to a fuel depot. There are some fire-risks, defined by the ‘Safety Region ‘Utrecht’. To minimise the risks of a huge fire and the loss of buses, concrete walls are built as firewalls at the bus depot. This results in compartments for max. 40 buses each, separated by a concrete wall and a fire lane.

Charging facilities are mounted on the walls as well.

Objectives: Reduce the risk of losing a lot of buses in case of a fire. We take the risk of losing up to 40 buses (max) due to a fire. The concrete walls and the fire lanes ensure that a huge fire does not spread to other compartments. Although the loss of 40 buses is substantial, we can solve quickly and adequately to continue public transport operation.

Losing more than 40 buses, however, should compromise daily public transport operation.

20

Added value: Realising the risks of a fire at a bus depot for electric buses (depending on the location) and minimising the risk of a huge fire resulting in the loss of a substantial number of electric buses. Daily operation is guaranteed, despite the fire.

Transferability: Useful GP for locations of bus depots with a higher risk of fire (bus depots in the closer neighbourhood of fuel depots, chemical plants etc).

Better safe than sorry As a firefighter, you go through a lot. When, as a little boy, I wanted to become a fireman (I didn’t want to be a pilot or train driver: I wanted to be a fireman) I thought that I would have to put out a fire somewhere in our city every day. And then to hang behind a fire engine wearing one of those big helmets: I was totally into it.

And now that I am an adult, I have indeed succeeded in becoming a fireman. But it is a very different profession than I had previously thought. Much more versatile than just putting out fires: that is only a very small part of our job. In fact, although we still practice putting out fires every week, my job largely consists of checking and monitoring the safety of our residents.

And yes: sometimes we have to get a cat out of a tree and sometimes we have to fight a fire and sometimes the work is not fun at all because of the misery we experience, but the work is always very satisfying.

For example, yesterday I had a refresher course. If you think that you are ever done learning at the fire station, you are wrong: we still learn every day. So yesterday: together with two colleagues, I had to do a risk assessment at a bus depot and a next-door fuel depot on the south side of our city. ‘It’s a piece of cake’, you might say. And yes: we have more of these fuel depots in the vicinity of our city. And this one is south of the city, along the canal: little risk, even though we are dealing with a highly flammable liquid: the safety measures are so extensive that any calamity is nipped in the bud.

The fuel depot was indeed along the canal. There were no houses nearby, so the risk to our residents was small. But as I said: Next to the fuel depot was this bus depot of our city transport company. ‘Not a big risk’, you would say. But in addition to a lot of diesel buses, there were also electric buses parked here. That always makes extinguishing a fire a little more difficult. Electric vehicles can also burn very well and fighting that kind of fire requires specific knowledge. But we soon realized that a lot of effort had gone into reducing the risk of a fire spreading. Better safe than sorry. We let the manager of the bus depot inform us about the risks of having a bus depot situated next door to this fuel depot. Of course, with Murphy’s Law in mind, things will go wrong: and then the risk of a fire spreading must be limited. And here we learned how that’s done and how risks are calculated.

21

A concrete wall has been built around the bus depot. It is high enough to keep out most flames. An additional advantage was that the wall was used to attach gantries for charging the buses: a clever idea! In addition, the bus parking area has been divided into compartments. Each compartment can accommodate 40 buses. These compartments are also separated by concrete walls. And there is a wide path between two compartments: wide enough for a fire truck. In short: everything had been thought of to keep the fire as small as possible, either a fire spreading from the fuel depot next door or a fire at the bus depot itself.

We were given a good tour by the manager of the bus depot as well as by the manager of the fuel depot. There was enough time for additional questions, the people who work there have great knowledge of their profession, but also of fire preventing and fire safety. And what intrigued me was why each compartment can accommodate 40 buses. How did they come up with that number? Is it to keep any fire under control? Is it because a compartment can’t be bigger? Or did it happen to work out that way? The answer was stunning: If a compartment were to catch fire, an obvious option would be to let the compartment burn out in a controlled manner and, to focus on preventing the fire from spreading. So then 40 buses would be lost. And 40 buses can be replaced rather quickly and easily in public transport although of course: we have to improvise a little. If we were to lose 100 buses at the same time, this would have a huge impact on operations.

So, you see, everyone looks at safety from their perspective: I’ve learned something new: Prevention is better than cure, but if it cannot be prevented then you must ensure that the consequences can be managed. And that seems to have been done very well here. Let’s hope that we won’t have to test it in practice.

South Transdanubia Local e-bus transport operated by locally produced, stored and used renewable energy Location: Pécs, South Transdanubia, Hungary Short description: By setting up a microgrid in the future, the Public Transport Company of Pécs (Tüke Busz Plc.) would be able to fully cover its energy consumption (depot charging, energy consumption of buildings for transport management and maintenance) by 100% locally produced renewable energy.

Objectives: E-bus public transport in Pécs is a step ahead for the environment and climate-friendly operation of the Tüke Busz Plc. This could be further enhanced by using local renewable energy for the operation of the e-bus fleet and the local public transport organisation (PTO), too.

22

Two significant power plants are located at Pécs, which may cover the electric energy needs of the PCT. On one hand, a photovoltaic power plant with 10MW installed capacity produces more than 10 million kWh energy annually, covering the consumption of ca. 3300 households. This power plant is owned by the State (MVM Hungarowing Ltd). Besides, the biomass powerplant (Pannon Power Plant) owned by Veolia Plc generates electricity with its 50 MW (wood) and 35 MW (straw) blocks. The heat produced by this plant is used by the local district heating company for heating more than 31 000 households and 500 institutions. These capacities may cover the electricity and heat consumption of Tüke Busz Plc and many other facilities of the city.

Added value: If the generated energy can be consumed locally, a significant amount of distribution loss can be avoided. Therefore, less energy needs to be produced to cover the same level of consumption, which results in less CO2eq emissions. The operating costs of the Pécs e-bus fleet may also decrease significantly, as the PTC would be able to procure energy from local plants is at a reduced price, due to the decreased level of distribution losses.

Transferability: The eBussed project, in connection with the deployment of e-buses, also emphasises the low-carbon, climate-friendly operation of the city/region where e-buses are in service. The higher level of savings in pollutants can be also ensured by using locally produced, stored and used renewable energy sources. This makes the Good Practice potentially interesting for other regions, although the transfer of the Pécs practice has not been done yet.

Using test e-buses for identifying technical requirements for the city of Pécs Location: Pécs, South Transdanubia, Hungary Short description: In the context of the development of uniform technical requirements for e-bus developments and forming professional and community attitudes, the identification of the best local development e-bus solutions plays a crucial role.

Objectives: As learnt from the experience exchange in the eBussed project, several factors define the type and features of e-buses that are in use on the given settlement or region. The Good Practice describes an evidence-based approach that provides opportunities to test several types of buses before deciding in favour of a model to be used locally. For this above purpose, the Municipality of Pécs City from 2013 on delivered several e-bus tests. During this process, once an EVOPRO bus, four times BYD buses (midi and solo buses) were in test operation. In each case, the buses were in test 23

service for 1 week, on existing bus routes.

The tests proved to be appropriate for identifying the right technological parameters and solutions, possible bus manufacturers that comply with the e-mobility needs of the city (routes, morphology, etc.). The findings of this testing were widely communicated in the local media and the Pécs inhabitants - especially those who did not travel on the test buses - received their very first impressions in connection with locally operated e-buses.

Added value: Especially in the case of testing BYD buses, the cost per kilometre was 5-6 times lower than of the diesel bus. The total cost of operation, the lower maintenance costs, etc. – based on information received from bus manufacturers and from other regions where such tests were already carried out – underlined the good prospects related to e-bus deployment.

Transferability: E-bus tests before deploying the electric buses are widely applied in different European Union countries. The current practice could be potentially interesting for other regions to learn from technological and process management terms. In technological regards, the appropriateness of the size and technology parameters of e-buses can be tested in local environments. Any non-effective procedure of local politicians/decision-makers proposing the deployment of e-buses, followed by non-experts preparing the purchase/ procurements, without any evidence-based reference points, should be altered. Instead, the process should start by gathering experience to support decision-making. Some Hungarian cities already considered the experiences of Pécs before launching their e-bus procurements.

4.2. Regional differences, similarities and synthesis of findings In the process of experience exchange, we discovered that good practice in one region may be good practice in another region too, however, with differences due to local characteristics. This strengthens our view that there is no one single good practice that works for all, but a rather good practice that can be an inspiration for others and needs to be adapted to regional specifics. A responsible and sensible transfer requires brainpower from those who want to take up this practice and is ideally flanked with the regular exchange at the operational level with stakeholders who own the good practice. Only then can the knowledge be transferred successfully.

One of the primary examples of good practice that is implemented in more than one partner region is pre-conditioning. Among eBussed partners, it is applied in Hamburg, Utrecht and Turku, for buses that are operated with depot charging only (Hamburg) and for those 24

which are additionally being charged en route via pantograph too (Utrecht and Turku). The level of automation differs though: While bus drivers in Turku start the heating of each bus manually one hour before they set off, Utrecht uses a timer in the bus and Hamburg has switched to fully automated pre-conditioning integrated with the dispositioning system. But would the latter make sense for Turku? As a result of discussions within Thematic Working Group no. 2, we concluded that it largely depends on the number of buses you want to operate. The degree of system integration will naturally increase with the number of buses which, in turn, will influence the cost-benefit ratio. The eBussed project has published a thematic article on (automatic) pre-conditioning.

Another example of good practice with different characteristics is the charging strategy.

While opportunity charging may be the best choice in one region, it may be depot charging in another. Interesting though are the arguments for or against one or the other, the decisive factors. Opportunity charging (OC) can be beneficial if the buses are operated on one line (as is the case in Turku and partly in Utrecht), while Hamburg has decided against OC – interestingly, both transport operators did so, because buses are not operated on lines, but rather routes which make OC less attractive if not irrelevant. Another reason against OC was the space needed for the charging infrastructure. A test terminal showed that acceptance from citizens or rather the absence of it should not be underestimated. Whether a bus is operated in settlement areas or rural areas with longer distances but fewer stops may also influence the charging strategy; the trade-off between battery size and battery weight (which has an influence too) can be crucial. In one of the good practice examples from Hamburg some more factors have been mentioned, but eventually, each region wanting to deploy e-buses needs to find out for themselves which is the best charging strategy for them.

The outcomes of the Interregional Learning Event Key messages from the impulse talks: The transition is complex and requires a strong will to attach value to sustainability and social responsibility.

Tasks towards e-mobility: - Convince (technical and economical data) - Compare (range, capacity, TCO) and - Communicate (provide knowledge) Challenges: smaller range, passenger capacity, service life and reliability 25

Game changers - tender driven, cross-over, articulated, technical evolution - are needed.

Workshop conclusions: - More cooperation is needed to generate, communicate and spread knowledge as well as information to overcome technical challenges.

- Exchange and knowledge sharing are desirable, but also limited as private companies have to improve their competitiveness.

- There are many similarities, but also fundamental differences when it comes to operational requirements.

- Special requirements regarding topography and climate conditions as well as historical cities or inner cities. Further research and guidelines are needed.

- Interoperability is a fundamental issue.

Key messages from the panel discussion: - Unifying factor is the aspect of financing where innovation is still needed.

- Operators have to change their perspective when it comes to the lifetime of buses.

- Battery price is a decisive factor.

- Possibilities of harmonization are limited due to national specifics (e.g. subsidies, governmental support, weather conditions…)

- Operation of e-buses is different compared to diesel buses, but not more complex.

- Different national tenders are challenging.

- There is a need for better collaboration and discussion between all stakeholders to be successful.

26

5. Recommendations and action plans For the video that was presented at the Interregional Learning Event, we interviewed the CEO of Hamburg’s second-largest public transport operator VHH, Toralf Müller. His answers include valuable recommendations.

Which main challenges at the start of the e-bus transition did you encounter?

“At the start of the project, the biggest difficulty was understanding the extent of the topic. We started with the view that we would simply replace a diesel bus with an e-bus. However, we realized that an e-bus is fundamentally different and all the processes have to be scrutinized, new infrastructure has to be built, and new staff has to be recruited for the various new issues. Understanding that was the biggest challenge for us.

Switching to 100% emission-free public transport is a very complex matter, which consists of many different subtopics.

Here in Hamburg, we are forerunners and are currently experiencing what this means. Many issues are being tested and implemented for the first time: complex charging infrastructure, larger fleets or IT topics. We are pioneers in this area and are aware of the challenges involved.

We are breaking new ground and are doing a lot of research. This was not clear when we started. We realised that we are actually part of the technology development, and this is most efficient when you exchange with others as much as possible: Working with benchmarks, looking at what others are doing and exchanging experiences. We work together closely with manufacturers, suppliers and other transport companies. This helps us to define our way. It´s important to constantly reflect on whether we are using the right technology and whether we are on the right way. And that can only be done with external help.

At this point, it cannot be said which technology will prevail in each field of application. In case of our company, we offer different transportation services: Minibuses, highway bus services and express bus services, each of them having particular requirements about the technology employed. I presume that different technologies will be used in different areas of application.”

What are your top five recommendations?

“Do it consistently, not trying to preserve old processes, but fully engaging with the new technology. Be open for suggestions, walk all the way with the necessary technological changes and get respective IT support in due time.”

27

Good practices taken up by other partners for their Action Plans This section of the report will be filled in at a later stage of phase 1 when each partner will undertake the formulation of their Action Plan based on the chosen experiences acquired from the other partners.

28

6. Conclusions Although in pandemic times the exchange with experts and stakeholders seems difficult, all partners managed to have some exchange of experience and provided valuable input to Thematic Working Group no. 2. The process of collaboration and exchange was not set out from the beginning but rather developed from what partners contributed. What we have now is a collection of good practices and this report on technological requirements in e-bus deployment in the partner regions. This can be a source of inspiration for others, encouraging them to take up some of the good practice we provide here, or to learn from the lessons we have taken. Ideally, we manage to spark off actions and development towards the transition from fossil-fuelled public transport to more sustainable, electric transport.

All deployment of e-buses these days can still be categorised as pioneering work. This is mainly due to the fast technological development in this field.

For any potential transfer of good practice from the eBussed project, the framework conditions and circumstances under which the practice will be implemented in another region, need to be examined carefully and checked for local specifics. A transfer needs a lot of consideration to become a success. Exchange with stakeholders and GP owners is key.

However, only the take-up regions know their circumstances. These may be influenced by geographic aspects like climate or topography, but also by political background, historic background or current events.

29

Annex 1 Matrices for operational requirements and technical requirements derived from it

This project report reflects the author's views only and the Interreg Europe programme authorities are not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

32