Least Cost Vehicle Charging in a Smart Neighborhood Considering Uncertainty and Battery Degradation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper assesses the impact of different electric vehicle charging strategies on smart grid energy costs, specifically accounting for battery degradation due to cycle depths, state of charge, and uncertainties in charging demand and electricity prices. This paper is well-written and organized. Comments to the authors:

1) Explain how the uncertainty related to electric vehicles is handled in this paper.

2) Scenario tree structure is difficult to understand. It can be presented in a better way.

3) Explain each component of the objective function in equation (1) must be explained in a detailed way. And also provide cost coefficients.

4)  What is the impact of battery degradation on the present work?

5) Comment on the computation time required for each case.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your careful feedback. Please see our responses and actions in the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In general I find this paper developing a thorough model for the cost of energy for vehicle charging given varying costs of energy interesting and well written, though a bit dense and hard to follow in places.

 

Some minor points that could be addressed to improve the paper:

Section 2.3.1 does not represent a Mass Balance, and is in fact an Energy Balance.  Please reevaluate this and correct if appropriate.

It would be useful to the readers if the rationale for the non-linearity of the information presented in “Table 1. CHP segment breakpoint data”.  In particular, given that you can import power, if the CHP system is then “heat controlled” it seems it would a better choice to simply operate the CHP system at 100% load and time average it to yield the 25%, 50%, 75% states, unless this is explicitly not an option.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

In context of improving the readability I suggest that (like 157) the sentence “A scenario tree branches due to uncertain events, not based on distinct decisions. C.f., Figure 1.” Was actually intended to have a comma after the word decisions, as in “…distinct decisions, c.f., Figure 1.”  Given that the paper is intended for an international audience, spelling it out in writing as “…distinct decisions as illustrated in Figure 1.” may, in fact, be best.  This is, of course, between the authors and the editors…

Author Response

Thank you very much for your careful feedback. Please see our responses and actions in the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf