MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2256094151 · doi:10.14288/1.0108536

Electric vehicle charging : impact review for multi-user residential buildings in British Columbia

2014· article· en· W2256094151 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guy Impey

Notice bibliographique

RevuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésArchitectural engineeringElectric lightElectric vehicleEngineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceElectrical engineeringPower (physics)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Early steps in shifting the energy delivery means for urban automotive transportation from fossil fuels to electricity have encountered somewhat unexpected obstacles in the case of charging infrastructure installations in multiple unit residential buildings (MURBs). In these buildings, unfamiliarity on the part of the general public with electricity and electric vehicle technology combined with numerous strata governance and installation cost issues have combined to slow the rate of electric vehicle charging installations despite available incentives. The amount of power required for electric vehicle charging can create significant effects within building electrical distribution systems depending on the level of implementation planned. Present regulations mandate that each electric vehicle (EV) charging circuit must be considered as a full, continuous electrical load for the purposes of designing electrical wiring and equipment. For a level 2 charging circuit (6.6 kW), this translates into an electrical load larger than a standard residential clothes dryer which must be treated as if it is always in use for each circuit of this type installed. Making provisions for EV charging in new MURB designs can be achieved technically by the building design community. This is now in progress and is motivated largely due to changes to City of Vancouver building regulations that came into force in 2011. However, if the planned number and type of vehicles to use EV circuits does not materialize as new MURBs become occupied, then these provisions will result in unused building electrical distribution system infrastructure and attendant sunk costs. Adding EV charging in existing MURBs is much more challenging and expensive than for new construction projects. Retrofitting for significant levels of new EV loads will result in a lack of electrical capacity in the lower portions of building distribution systems first and create the need for electrical equipment upgrades. In smaller MURBs, provision for significant amounts of EV charging will have relatively more impact and the effects may be felt higher up the distribution system towards the service entrance. Regulations governing how EV loads must be accounted for in B.C. building electrical designs will likely be modified with more widespread EV adoption as demand control features are integrated into building control systems. In the near term, basic demand control systems can control individual EV chargers in an on/off manner but eventually, smart grid technology will allow building control systems or outside agencies to control the chargers for all connected EVs to most efficiently use the available building electrical capacity while still providing satisfactory recharging performance for EV owners. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,921
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,186
Écart entre enseignants0,180 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Même sujetElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureTravaux en français237 207