This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.
Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID
Exploiting PHEV to Augment
Power System Reliability
Xue Wang, Student Member, IEEE, and Rajesh Karki, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—Environmental concerns with gasoline vehicles have
led to increased attention to electric vehicles in recent years.
Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) use both electricity and
gasoline to propel the vehicle, and is being recognized as a poten-
tial alternative to conventional vehicles. PHEVs offer opportunity
to use electric energy generated by renewable resources and sig-
nificantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The electric energy
requirement of PHEV can, however, cause negative impacts on
the power system reliability, especially when the size of a PHEV
fleet is relatively large. This paper presents the development of
a probabilistic model considering the driving distance, charging
times, charging locations, battery state of charge, and charging
requirements of a PHEV. A methodology using hybrid analytical
and Monte Carlo simulation approach is presented to evalu-
ate the reliability of a power system integrated with PHEVs,
considering the important PHEV characteristics, charging sce-
narios, and power system parameters. Studies are presented
on the IEEE-reliability test system to illustrate the impact of
PHEV penetration in a power system. Based on the study results,
the methods of augmenting system reliability through controlled
PHEV charging are presented in this paper.
Index Terms—Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV), power
system reliability, system planning, probability methods, reliabil-
ity modeling.
I. I NTRODUCTION
HERE is growing environmental concern associated with
T conventional transport vehicles that burn petroleum fuel
and release harmful greenhouse gas emissions. An electric
vehicle (EV) utilizes electric energy stored in rechargeable bat-
tery packs to propel the vehicle. The electric energy used in EV
can be produced from renewable energy resources, and con-
tribute to significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in
the transport sector. Among different types of EV that appear
in the development process, PHEV is a relatively new concept
developed in the last decade.
PHEV is a hybrid electric vehicle, which is propelled by
a gasoline engine and an electric motor. Rechargeable battery
packs are included in the vehicle. The fuel-switching capability
provides further flexibility on the driving range and the charg-
Manuscript received May 21, 2015; revised October 29, 2015; accepted
December 10, 2015. Paper no. TSG-00571-2015.
The authors are with the Power System Research Group, Department
of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Saskatchewan,
Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A9, Canada (e-mail: rajesh.karki@usask.ca;
shaylacanada@gmail.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSG.2016.2515989
1949-3053 c 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
ing behavior of the vehicle compared to other EV models.
PHEV can be charged through an external electric power
source and acts as a power grid load with a specific charac-
teristic. The concept of PHEV evolved from EV development
as a more potential vehicle technology due to its flexibility in
driving range and reliability of transport due to diversity in
the redundancy of the propulsion energy. The use of PHEV
is expected to grow in the near future to the extent that the
reliability of power systems may be adversely influenced if
not addressed during system planning. This paper is therefore
focused on the reliability impact of PHEV on electric power
systems.
Many researchers have been involved in the study of vari-
ous issues associated with PHEV injection in power systems
since the first PHEV prototype was built. Potential impacts of
PHEVs on electricity demand and prices were studied in [1].
Ref. [2] presents the basic concepts of modeling EV as power
system load. A probabilistic method to simulate PHEV driving
and charging behavior under vehicle-to-grid scenario incorpo-
rating vehicle travel models is proposed in [3]. The concept of
vehicle-to-grid has potential in future after significant growth
of PHEV leads to appropriate market mechanisms to encour-
age customer participation. These papers provide certain basic
concepts in modeling PHEV components and characteristics
in general that are relevant to this paper. Deterministic and
stochastic analytical methods are used in [4] to evaluate PHEV
impacts on distribution systems from different aspects, such
as voltage deviations and power losses [5]. A stochastic pro-
gramming to coordinate PHEV charging is proposed in [6]
to minimize the losses and improve the distribution system
performance. A simulation method to assess the reliability
of residential distribution systems integrated with PHEV is
presented in [7] and [8]. These and other references, such
as [9], provide useful contribution to performance assessment
of local distribution systems influenced by PHEV. Distribution
system reliability primarily falls within the responsibility of
distribution system entities, and a variety of performance
based regulation and reward/penalty mechanisms are being
implemented to encourage investments for reliability in dis-
tribution systems. An equally important task is to plan the
resources for the entire power system and devise appropri-
ate policies for PHEV and relevant system resources so that
future power systems are gradually transformed to efficiently
integrate anticipated PHEV growth with acceptable reliabil-
ity. This task falls within the capacity adequacy domain, and
is the focus of this paper. Sustainable energy sources are
also combined with PHEV in some research [10] to analyze
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID
related energy, economic and environment impacts on power
system. When the number of PHEVs connected to a power
system is considerable, the resulting change in the energy
demand characteristic will considerably impact the overall sys-
tem reliability. The reliability of a power system will be highly
influenced by PHEV characteristics and operation strategies
in the near future since PHEV penetration is expected to
significantly increase. PHEV penetration is the ratio of the
maximum PHEV load in the system to the original system
peak load [11]. The reliability impact of PHEV growth on
overall system reliability is presented in [11]. Ref. [12] mod-
els the charging/discharging characteristics of PHEV to assess
the reliability of power systems integrated with wind power.
It is important to accurately model the driving behavior in the
evaluation. Ref. [13] presents a real-time smart load manage-
ment algorithm considering random arrival and departure times
to improve the performance of residential networks. Ref. [14]
presents statistical analysis of arrival and departure times to
develop daily driving models that can be used for a range of
practical applications. These concepts have been used and fur-
ther modified using NHTS 2009 transportation data [15], [16]
for application in power system adequacy studies for resource
planning and policy making. It will also be necessary to model
and incorporate other important factors, such as modes of
charging, access to charging facility, correlation of PHEV with
load profiles with diurnal and seasonal variation and key power
system parameters while making realistic assumptions in the
modeling process. It is necessary to develop appropriate mod-
els that recognize PHEV behavior, the power system to which
the PHEVs are connected, and the interaction between the
PHEV model and the system model.
The paper first presents the development of the PHEV
reliability model that incorporates the important PHEV char-
acteristics. The individual PHEV model is then combined with
other PHEV units to create a model for an entire PHEV
fleet that consists of a number of PHEVs with different
charging and driving behaviors. A sequential Monte Carlo
simulation method is used to incorporate the various mod-
els while maintaining the chronology of the events and
the correlation between the PHEV behavior and load vari-
ation. The reliability of a power system with PHEV fleet
considering certain PHEV characteristics and charging sce-
narios is evaluated, and recommended charging control meth-
ods are proposed in order to augment the overall system
reliability.
II. M ODELING PHEV FOR R ELIABILITY E VALUATION
A fully charged PHEV will initially operate in the “all-
electric mode” using the electric power provided by the
battery. The battery state of charge (SOC) is used to indi-
cate the amount of electric energy available in the battery. As
the vehicle is operated, the battery is gradually discharged and
the value of battery SOC declines until it reaches the mini-
mum value about 0.2, which means 20% of the full capacity.
When the minimum battery SOC is reached, the vehicle is
switched to the “gasoline mode”. Then gasoline becomes the
main energy source to drive the vehicle.
TABLE I
PARAMETER OF PHEV-30
Lithium-ion batteries are widely used in PHEVs and
are normally sized to provide enough capacity for short
commutes [17]. PHEV-30 is a typical model used by many
manufactures. The number 30 refers to 30 miles commute dis-
tance capability in the all-electric mode of operation. Several
research institutes, such as the Sloan Automotive Laboratory at
MIT (U.S.) [18], United States Advanced Battery Consortium
and National Renewable Energy Laboratory [19] use similar
models. Table I provides the important parameters of PHEV-
30 extracted from a leading 2014 vehicle manufacturer model
description [20]. The methodology developed and presented in
this paper is illustrated using the parameters of PHEV-30. The
methodology can, however, be similarly applied to other types
of PHEVs. The results will obviously depend on the PHEV
model parameters.
A. Important PHEV Characteristics for Reliability Modeling
1) Charging Scenarios of PHEV: There are a number of
options available to the PHEV owners in deciding the modes
and places to recharge the batteries in their vehicles. PHEV
charging scenarios can be classified according to different
charging places. The phrases, “home charging” and “pub-
lic/home charging” are used in this paper to describe the
different charging locations. The former scenario refers to the
charging behavior when home is the only place for PHEV
charging. If the PHEV can also be plugged into the power grid
during daytime in public areas, it is termed as “public/home
charging”. These choices affect the time of day charging pat-
terns, and therefore impact the charging characteristics that
need to be represented in the developed models.
The growing environmental concerns are leading PHEV
development towards reducing gasoline and increasing elec-
tric energy usage. In order to achieve this goal, vehicle owners
will need to utilize battery energy as the primary propulsion
source before using gasoline. The PHEVs are being primarily
designed for gasoline aided electric propulsion energy stored
from home charging. The “home charging” characteristics will
have a large impact on system reliability as the PHEV load
coincides with the evening peak of the daily load profile in res-
idential consumers. This scenario has therefore been primarily
considered in the modeling process. In order to consider the
impact of daytime charging of PHEV on system adequacy, the
“public/home charging” scenario has also been incorporated
in the model development. The main contribution to adequacy
indices comes from the coincidence of PHEV charging with
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

WANG AND KARKI: EXPLOITING PHEV TO AUGMENT POWER SYSTEM RELIABILITY 3

the daytime peaks, and the effect will be significant in summer

peaking systems.
Table I shows that PHEV-30 can be charged either at 120V
or 240V, which are designated as “normal charging” and “fast
charging” respectively. It should be noted the charging time is
significantly reduced and the charging power is increased when
fast charging method is selected. Assumptions are usually
made in system modeling based on reasonable practical signif-
icance in order to reduce complexity. A reasonable assumption
is that “fast charging” is employed during public charging to
minimize charging time, and consequently owners will fully
charge their vehicles to prolong battery life [21]. Due to these
reasons, partial and multiple public charging is not considered. Fig. 1. Battery SOC during the charging process.
Normal charging at 120 V is considered for home charging
that usually occurs at the end of a day. Because of the rela-
tively short all-electric mileage of PHEV-30, it is highly likely
that PHEV subjected to public charging will also need to be
recharged at home. The limitation of the model is based on
these practical assumptions.
2) Daily Driving Distance: The daily driving distance of
a vehicle is an important parameter that can vary consid-
erably from one day to another, and for different vehicles.
Vehicle travel data published in the latest National Household
Travel Survey (NHTS) 2009 [15], was analyzed to obtain
the probability distribution of the daily driving distance, D.
A lognormal distribution described by the mathematical equa-
tion in (1) was obtained using the MATLAB best-fit criterion.
A similar lognormal distribution was also obtained in [22] Fig. 2. Power demand of a PHEV during the charging process.
from 2001 NHTS data. The mean value of the daily driv-
ing distance data obtained from the survey was calculated to
be 54.6 miles. Its lognormal is 4.0, and is the value of the 4) Battery Performance During Charging: In order to uti-
parameter mD in (1). The standard deviation σD parameter lize battery energy as the primary propulsion source to reduce
of 0.92 was obtained from MATLAB best fit analysis of the environmental impact of gasoline combustion, the PHEV own-
distribution of the survey data. ers must exploit the opportunity to recharge their PHEV before
1   the next commute. It has therefore been assumed that the elec-
√ e −(ln x−μD ) /2σD
2 2
fD (x) = (1) tric power is the primary driving source and the owners will
xσD 2π
recharge their vehicle battery to full when the battery SOC
3) Battery Performance During Driving: For a fully falls below 0.8 in order to reduce the reliance on gasoline.
charged PHEV, the battery performance during discharging Due to these concerns and the development trend of PHEV,
process can be divided into two distinct periods: the initial similar assumptions have also been used by other researchers,
“all-electric” driving period, and the “gasoline” driving period. such as in [12]. For typical lithium-ion battery, the battery
Equation (2) gives the battery SOC during vehicle driving SOC increases almost linearly with the charging time as shown
period. The first condition of (2) gives the SOC for the “all- in Fig. 1.
electric period”, which is battery dependent, and the battery The PHEV during its charging mode becomes an electric
SOC declines almost linearly with the driving distance, D. The load to the power system that supplies the electric energy.
minimum battery SOC is 0.2, i.e., 20% of the rated capacity. The load profile of a PHEV is characterized by the charging
In the case of PHEV-30, the first stage will approximately last power and duration. Fig. 2 shows the power supplied to the
for 30 miles. The second condition of (2) is for the “gasoline” battery during the charging process in per unit of the rated
mode, where the battery SOC fluctuates as it frequently and charging power. The duration of the PHEV load is the time
randomly charges and discharges. The battery charges for short taken to fully charge the battery, and can be calculated using
durations due to regenerative braking, which allows restoring Fig. 1 with the knowledge of the initial battery SOC. The
energy whenever a PHEV slows down. The battery is dis- power demand of PHEV load as a function of the charging
charged to provide energy as the vehicle speeds up again. time can be calculated using Fig. 2.
A uniformly distributed random number Y between 0.2 and 5) Charging Start Time: The charging start time is another
0.3 is used to obtain the SOC value in the second stage of the important parameter in PHEV modeling. In a normal situ-
driving period. ation, a PHEV charging would commence as soon as the

max{0.2, 1 − 0.0333D}, D ≤ X vehicle arrives home. In this case, the “last trip ending
SOC = (2)
Y, D>X time” is also the start time of the home charging scenario.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID

Fig. 3. Battery modeling during its charging cycle.

Fig. 4. PHEV fleet modeling procedure.

The travel data of “last trip ending time” Th obtained from

public charging. The battery SOC can be calculated from the
the NHTS 2009 survey [15] was analyzed to obtain a mean
knowledge of the daily driving distance using (2). If the cal-
value μTh of 17.4 hours, or 5:24 PM, and standard devia-
culated SOC is less than 0.8, the PHEV will be plugged in for
tion σTh of 3.3 hours. Using the MATLAB best-fit analysis
battery charging. The charging duration or the time taken to
tool, the data was described by two normal distributions for
fully charge the PHEV battery is then obtained by using the
ending times before and after (μTh − 12) hours expressed
relation in Fig. 1. The amount of power supplied to the bat-
mathematically by (3).
tery for the charging duration is then determined using Fig. 2,
⎧
2 
⎪ − x−μTh /2σT2 which then provides the load or demand profile of an indi-
⎨ √ e1 h , (μ
Th − 12) < x ≤ 24
σTh 2π vidual PHEV in time chronology. If there is more than one
fTh (x) =
2 
⎪
⎩ √ − x+24−μTh /2σT2
h , 0 < x ≤ (μ
charging cycle within a day for the PHEV, the load profiles are
Th − 12)
1
e
σTh 2π similarly created for each charging cycle, and a time sequential
(3) load profile is obtained for the entire day.
The number of charging cycles within a day depends on the
It is assumed that the public charging of the PHEV will frequency of the PHEV charging processes. There is only one
begin as soon as the vehicle reaches the workplace. The travel charging cycle in a day if charging at home is the only option
data of “arriving workplace time” Tp obtained from the NHTS that occurs at the end of the day.
2009 survey [15] was analyzed using MATLAB best-fit anal-
ysis tool to obtain a normal distribution described by the
C. PHEV Fleet Model
mathematical equation (4). In this equation, the mean value
μTp is 8.5 hours, or 8:30 AM, and standard deviation σTp is PHEV fleet consists of a number of PHEVs with different
2.4 hours. charging and driving behaviors. These parameters are stochas-

1 −(x−μTp )2 /2σTp
2
fTp = √ e
xσTp 2π
B. PHEV Individual Model
The PHEV becomes a power system load during its charging
mode, and therefore, a load model is developed to repre-
sent the PHEV in assessing the reliability impact of PHEV
on a power system. The model is developed for a charging
cycle considering the parameters discussed in Section II-A.
Fig. 3 presents the composition of a charging cycle. Each block
in Fig. 3 represents a model development for a specific PHEV
parameter.
The driving distance for each vehicle is simulated using
a random number in Eq. (1), and the driving distance both
ways are assumed to be equal for the scenario considering
tic and interrelated with each other. The sequential modeling
(4) process shown in Fig. 3 is repeated for all the PHEVs existing
in the fleet. A Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) method is used
to build the overall model for a PHEV fleet by combining
individual PHEV models. Fig. 4 presents the fleet modeling
procedure. In the beginning of the procedure, random num-
bers are generated for each PHEV to calculate their parameters
using the distributions showed in (1)-(4). The power demand
curve is then obtained for each vehicle. The daily sequential
loads for all the n vehicles are recursively aggregated to obtain
the sequential load model for the entire fleet using (5), where,
h∈24 is the hour of the day, Lh is the fleet load at Hour h,
and LPHEVI,h is the load of the ith PHEV at Hour h.
n
Lh = LPHEVi,h (5)
i=1
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

WANG AND KARKI: EXPLOITING PHEV TO AUGMENT POWER SYSTEM RELIABILITY 5

Fig. 5. (a) Daily load model of individual PHEVs for the “home charg-
ing” scenario. (b) Daily load model of 100 PHEVs for the “home charging” Fig. 6. (a) Daily load model of individual PHEVs for the “public/home
scenario. charging” scenario. (b) Daily load model of 100 PHEVs for the “public/home
charging” scenario.
The simulation is repeated until the convergence criteria are
met. Fig. 5a shows the daily sequential load models of individ-
ual PHEV expressed in per unit of the respective peak demand
of 1.14 kW under “home charging” scenario. Fig. 5b shows
the load model of the entire fleet of 100 PHEVs with a peak
demand of 79.05 kW.
PHEV owners can charge their vehicles during daytime
and/or at home in the evening in the “public/home charging”
scenario. A fully charged PHEV in public will then be dis-
charged on the way home. For a PHEV charged both in public
and at home during a day, there are multiple charging cycles
within a day. Two charging cycles were considered in this
study to obtain the daily power demand curve.
Fig. 6a shows the daily sequential load models of individual Fig. 7. The IEEE-RTS daily load curves with the highest and lowest annual
PHEV expressed in per unit of the respective peak demand loads.
of 2.67 kW in the “public/home charging” scenario. Fig. 6b
shows the load model of the entire fleet of 100 PHEVs with
a peak demand of 74.18 kW under this scenario. This can the reliability impacts of PHEV penetration on an electric
be compared to the “home charging” scenario in Fig. 5b. It power system. The IEEE-RTS has a total installed capacity
can be observed from Fig. 6b that there is a new peak during of 3405 MW and a peak load of 2850 MW. A period analysis
daytime introduced due to public charging, and the peak value is carried out by dividing a year into two seasons, in order
during the daytime is higher than the evening “home charging” to incorporate the seasonality effect on the system reliability.
peak because of the higher charging power needed in the “fast Fig. 7 shows the 24-hour chronological load for the winter
charging” mode. day with the annual peak load that occurs in the month of
December, and the summer day with the annual minimum load
which occurs in the month on September. Survey data [15]
III. P OWER S YSTEM M ODEL FOR indicates that there is no significant seasonal variation in daily
R ELIABILITY A NALYSIS driving pattern of PHEVs. The seasonality effect of PHEV
The IEEE Reliability Test System (IEEE-reliability test model is not considered, as its impact on system adequacy will
system (RTS)) [23] is used as the test system to illustrate be insignificant. The simulated daily PHEV model is integrated
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID
Fig. 8. Summer daily load models of the IEEE-RTS with and without PHEV.
Fig. 9. Winter daily load models of the IEEE-RTS with and without PHEV.
considering the diurnal and seasonal variations in the residen-
tial load model to obtain separate aggregated load models for
the winter and the summer periods.
IV. R ELIABILITY I MPACTS OF PHEV C HARGING
m
The reliability impacts of different levels of PHEV penetra-
tion are investigated in this paper. As part of the evaluation
process, the system load model is modified by time sequen-
tial superimposition of the PHEV load model with the hourly
chronological system load model. Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 show the
summer and winter daily load models obtained by aggregating
the original load with the PHEV load considering an example
of 25% PHEV penetration, which amounts to 475,000 PHEVs
in the system under study. The figures show the original system
load model without PHEV, modified load model consider-
ing PHEV in the “home charging” scenario, and modified
load model considering PHEV in the “public/home charg-
ing” scenario. In studies considering public/home charging,
it is assumed that all the PHEV can be charged at home, and
a certain percentage of the total PHEVs can also be charged
in public. A range of public charging percentages are consid-
ered to assess their impact of system adequacy. An example
of 40% public charging is considered in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9. The
horizontal line in both the figures indicates the annual peak
load of the original IEEE-RTS without PHEV.
It can be observed from these two figures that the
overall system power demand is significantly increased
TABLE II
S YSTEM R ELIABILITY I NDICES FOR THE IEEE-RTS
C ONSIDERING PHEV C HARGING S CENARIOS
due to PHEV charging during the peak hours (approxi-
mately from 16:00 to 21:00) of the day. The peak load
value substantially exceeds the original annual peak load
of 2850 MW during the winter season, which indicates the
overlap of PHEV fleet charging demand and system original
household demand. Comparing to “home charging” scenario,
“public/home charging” has a lower impact on increasing the
annual peak load. This scenario utilizes additional load during
the daytime including the “valley” period in the morning.
The modified chronological load model that incorporates
the PHEV model is then converted to a load duration curve
which is a load profile in the descending order plotted against
time. A period analysis [24] is done to incorporate the effect
of seasonality by dividing a year into summer and winter peri-
ods. System capacity models in the form of capacity outage
probability tables (COPT) [24] and system load models in
the form of load duration curves are created for each period.
The capacity model and the load model are convolved in each
period and aggregated to obtain the annual loss of load expec-
tation (LOLE) and loss of energy expectation (LOEE) indices
as expressed in (6) and (7) respectively [24].
m
n
LOLE = tk .pk hours / year (6)
k=1
i=1
n
LOEE = Ek .pk MWh / year (7)
k=1
i=1
Where, m is the number of periods in a year considered in
the period analysis; n is the number of capacity outage states
in the COPT developed for Period i; pk is the probability of
capacity outage in the kth outage state in the COPT; tk is
the number of hours of load curtailment caused by the kth
outage state; Ek is the energy curtailment caused by the kth
outage state.
The LOLE is the most widely used reliability index in
capacity planning, which determines the loss of load prob-
ability. The LOEE index quantifies the energy not supplied
due to loss of load, and can be used to assess the cost of
unreliability [24]. These two reliability indices are therefore
used to assess the impact of PHEV on system reliability in
this paper. Table II shows the LOLE and LOEE for the two
charging scenarios. It can be observed that these indices are
increased significantly when PHEV penetration is considered
in the analysis. This indicates that system reliability is deterio-
rated by the additional load due to PHEV charging. The indices
obtained for the “public/home charging” scenario are slightly
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

WANG AND KARKI: EXPLOITING PHEV TO AUGMENT POWER SYSTEM RELIABILITY 7

TABLE III
S YSTEM R ELIABILITY I NDICES W ITH I NCREASING PHEV
P ENETRATION C ONSIDERING H OME
C HARGING S CENARIO

higher than the indices obtained for the “home charging” sce-
nario. This is because the daytime load increases sharply with
PHEV penetration as shown in Fig. 6 in “public/home charg-
ing” due to “fast charging” that has approximately twice the
power demand of “normal charging”. At 25% PHEV penetra-
tion, both the daytime and evening peaks influence the system
adequacy indices in the “public/home charging” scenario, in
contrast to the “home charging only” scenario where only
the evening peaks mainly influence the indices. As a result,
the “public/home charging” scenario suffers a lower relia-
bility than the “home charging only” scenario. This effect
becomes more profound as PHEV penetration increases and
more vehicles have access to public charging.
The above indices are obtained considering 25% PHEV pen-
etration. It can be easily inferred that the system reliability
will further degrade if the PHEV penetration in the power
system is increased. Table III shows the reliability indices as
PHEV penetration is increased for “home charging” scenario.
It can be seen that the LOLE and LOEE increases signifi-
cantly as the PHEV penetration is increased from 0% to 50%.
It can therefore be concluded that the system reliability will
quickly deteriorate as PHEV sales increase in response to envi-
ronmental support unless reliability enhancement measures
are taken.
V. C ONTROLLING PHEV C HARGING FOR S YSTEM
R ELIABILITY I MPROVEMENT
The studies presented in the previous section assume that
PHEVs are plugged into the power grid for home charging
right after they arrive home. This is a valid assumption when
there is no intentional control on PHEV charging behavior,
and it is designated as “uncontrolled charging” in this paper.
The results of the reliability studies presented in Table III
clearly shows that “uncontrolled charging” of PHEV causes
rapid degradation of system reliability as PHEV penetration
increases. This section presents system reliability assessment
considering different control measures associated with PHEV
charging.
A. Controlling Charging Start Time
The impacts of varying the “charging start time” of PHEVs
on the overall system reliability are investigated in this section.
It can be observed from Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 that the PHEV charg-
ing demand overlaps with system original household demand.
Fig. 10. System LOLE of different charging start time in different PHEV
penetration levels.
Fig. 11. System LOEE of different charging start time in different PHEV
penetration levels.
As a result, the overall system peak load increases as the pene-
tration of PHEV is increased in the power system. If the PHEV
load is shifted so that it does not coincide with the household
peak load, the overall system reliability will be improved.
A specific “charging start time” was selected in this study
to shift the PHEV load away from the household peak load.
A vehicle may arrive home before or after the selected “charg-
ing start time”. The probability of a PHEV arriving home
at a specified time can be obtained from the probability dis-
tribution expressed mathematically in (3). The PHEV model
considers the home arrival time of each vehicle, and the vehi-
cles arriving before and after the specified time are divided into
two groups. The vehicles that arrive home before the specified
“charging start time” will wait until the specified time to start
charging, whereas, the vehicles that arrive after the specified
time will begin charging immediately upon home arrival.
A sensitivity study was carried out by selecting four differ-
ent charging start times: 19:00, 22:00, 23:00 and 00:00 hours.
PHEV models were developed using these charging start times,
combined with the original load model, and convolved with
the system generation model to obtain the system reliability
indices. Studies were also carried out considering different
PHEV penetration levels. Fig. 10 and Fig. 11 show system
LOLE and LOEE obtained from these studies.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID
Fig. 12. System LOLE when different public charging percentages applied
to different PHEV penetration levels.
It is shown in the above figures that controlling the charging
start time has little impact on system reliability at 5% PHEV
penetration. But the impact on reliability increases with the
increase in PHEV penetration. It can be seen that the system
LOLE and LOEE are the highest when the “charging start
time” is specified to 19:00 hours. This is because the diurnal
peak household load occurs between 19:00 and 20:00 hours.
As the “charging start time” is moved to later at night, system
reliability is improved. It can be seen that even at 50% PHEV
penetration, the adverse impact on reliability is greatly reduced
when the vehicles start to charge at 00:00 hours. Using nor-
mal charging scenario, these vehicles can be fully charged at
7:00 in the morning according to Table I, which is acceptable
to most people who need to drive their vehicles to work.
B. Controlling Public Charging Percentage
It was assumed in the previous study that 40% of PHEV can
be charged through public charging. However, it is possible to
have more or less PHEVs charged in public. Therefore, the
impact of public charging percentage on system reliability is
discussed in this section.
The percentage of PHEV that have access to public charging
was varied from 0% to 80% of the total available PHEVs in
the system in increments of 20%. 0% public charging means
all the PHEVs are subjected to home charging only. PHEV
models were developed considering controlled home charging
start time of 00:00 and public charging scenario considering
two charging cycles in a day. The public charging start time
was obtained using (4), and the PHEV load model for this
charging cycle was repeatedly simulated considering the spec-
ified percentage of PHEV that have access to public charging
facility. The PHEV load model obtained for the two charg-
ing cycles was then combined with the original load model,
and convolved with the system generation model to obtain the
system reliability indices. The system LOLE and LOEE were
evaluated for the different cases of public charging percent-
ages of PHEV considering different PHEV penetration levels.
The results are shown in Fig. 12 and Fig. 13.
Fig. 13. System LOEE when different public charging percentages applied
to different PHEV penetration levels.
Under a given PHEV penetration level, as the public charg-
ing percentage increases from 0%, both the LOLE and the
LOEE indices decrease until 40%. The reduction in LOLE
and LOEE or the improvement in system reliability is due to
some of the evening load being shifted to the daytime and
causing the overall system load to decrease. On the other
hand, it can be seen from these two figures that when pub-
lic charging percentage is further increased above 40%, the
LOLE and LOEE indices begin to increase. In this case, the
daytime load exceeds the evening load and causes the overall
system reliability to degrade. The daytime load can quickly
rise with further increase in public charging since “fast charg-
ing” method is assumed for this scenario to supply the required
energy at high power and less time. When public charging per-
centage is under 40%, the system reliability mainly depends on
power demand during the evening influenced by home charg-
ing. As public charging is increased above 40%, there are two
demand peaks in a day of comparable magnitudes, and they
adversely affect the system reliability.
VI. C ONCLUSION
The paper presents a methodology to quantify the impacts
of PHEV penetration on a power system. An analytical PHEV
model is proposed considering its driving distance, charging
times, charging locations, battery SOC and charging require-
ments. A MCS method was used to aggregate individual
PHEV models into an overall PHEV fleet model. This model
was combined analytically with the system load and gener-
ation models to obtain system reliability indices. The results
show that the system reliability degrades very sharply to unac-
ceptable levels with increase in PHEV penetration if no control
measures are established for PHEV charging. The study results
show that the system reliability is highly dependent on the
time that users start to charge their vehicles after they arrive
home in the evening. The system reliability can be improved
by implementing a mechanism to encourage the users to post-
pone PHEV charging until later in the evening. The best results
were achieved when PHEVs start charging at midnight. The
impact of introducing a policy to control the percentage of
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
WANG AND KARKI: EXPLOITING PHEV TO AUGMENT POWER SYSTEM RELIABILITY
PHEV access to public charging was also investigated. A vari-
ation in this percentage resulted in significant changes to the
overall system reliability. It is recommended based on the
study results to promote a policy to limit public charging
to 40% of the PHEV that are primarily charged at home.
Further increase or decrease from this ratio results in a degra-
dation of system reliability. The developed PHEV reliability
models, and the presented methodology for power system reli-
ability evaluation incorporating PHEV penetration should be
useful to power system planners, policy makers and PHEV
manufacturers as well. It is believed that this paper makes
valuable contribution in providing relevant inputs in decision
making for future power systems that are expected to support
an increasing penetration of PHEVs.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. W. Hadley and A. Tsvetkova, “Potential impacts of plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles on regional power generation,” U.S. Dept. Energy, Oak
Ridge Nat. Lab., Oak Ridge, TN, USA, Tech. Rep. ORNL/TM-2007/150,
2008.
[2] A. Heider and H.-J. Haubrich, “Impact of wide-scale EV charging on
the power supply network,” in Proc. IEEE Colloq. Elect. Veh., London,
U.K., May 1998, pp. 6/1–6/4.
[3] C. Quinn, D. Zimmerle, and T. H. Bradley, “An evaluation of state-of-
charge limitations and actuation signal energy content on plug-in hybrid
electric vehicle, vehicle-to-grid reliability, and economics,” IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 483–491, Mar. 2012.
[4] J. Taylor, A. Maitra, M. Alexander, D. Brooks, and M. Duvall,
“Evaluation of the impact of plug-in electric vehicle loading on dis-
tribution system operations,” presented at the IEEE Power Energy Soc.
Gen. Meeting, Calgary, AB, Canada, 2009.
[5] R. C. Green, II, L. Wang, and M. Alam, “The impact of plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles on distribution networks: A review and outlook,” Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 544–553, 2011.
[6] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, and J. Driesen, “The impact of charging
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 371–380, Feb. 2010.
[7] Z. Wang, R. Yang, L. Wang, and J. Tan, “Reliability assessment of
integrated residential distribution and PHEV systems using Monte Carlo
simulation,” in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting (PES),
Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2013, pp. 1–5.
[8] W. Liu, M. Zhang, B. Zeng, L. Wu, and J. Zhang, “Analyzing the
impacts of electric vehicle charging on distribution system reliability,” in
Proc. IEEE Innov. Smart Grid Technol. Conf., Tianjin, China, May 2012,
pp. 1–6.
[9] L. Kelly, “Probabilistic modelling of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
impacts on distribution networks in British Columbia,” M.S. thesis,
Dept. Mech. Eng., Univ. Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, 2009.
[10] V. Marano and G. Rizzoni, “Energy and economic evaluation of PHEVs
and their interaction with renewable energy sources and the power grid,”
in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Veh. Electron. Safety, Columbus, OH, USA,
2008, pp. 84–89.
[11] B. Falahati, Y. Fu, Z. Darabi, and L. Wu, “Reliability assessment of
power systems considering the large-scale PHEV integration,” in Proc.
IEEE Veh. Power Propul. Conf. (VPPC), Chicago, IL, USA, Sep. 2011,
pp. 1–6.
[12] Y. Xiong and D. Jayaweera, “Reliability based strategic integration
of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in power systems,” in Proc. IEEE
Probabilist. Methods Appl. Power Syst. (PMAPS), Durham, NC, USA,
Jul. 2014, pp. 1–6.
[13] S. Deilami, A. S. Masoum, P. S. Moses, and M. A. S. Masoum, “Real-
time coordination of plug-in electric vehicle charging in smart grids to
minimize power losses and improve voltage profile,” IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 456–467, Sep. 2011.
9
[14] T.-K. Lee, Z. Bareket, T. Gordon, and Z. S. Filipi, “Stochastic mod-
eling for studies of real-world PHEV usage: Driving schedule and
daily temporal distributions,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 61, no. 4,
pp. 1493–1502, May 2012.
[15] NHTS Data—Version 2.1. [Online]. Available: http://nhts.ornl.gov/
download.shtml#2009, accessed Jan. 2016.
[16] A. Santos, N. McGuckin, H. Y. Nakamoto, D. Gray, and S. Liss,
“Summary of travel trends—2009 national household travel survey,”
U.S. Dept. Transp., Fed. Highway Admin., Washington, DC, USA, Tech.
Rep. FHWA-PL-ll-022, 2009.
[17] A. Elgowainy, A. Burnham, M. Wang, J. Molburg, and A. Rousseau,
“Well-to-wheels energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles,” Energy Syst. Div., Argonne Nat. Lab., Lemont,
IL, USA, Tech. Rep. ANL/ESD/10-1, 2009.
[18] M. A. Kromer and J. B. Heywood, “Electric powertrains: Opportunities
and challenges in the U.S. light-duty vehicle fleet,” Sloan Automotive
Lab., Lab. Energy Environ. Massachusetts Inst. Technol., Cambridge,
MA, USA, Tech. Rep. LFEE 2007-03 RP, 2007.
[19] A. Pesaran, “Battery requirements for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles—
Analysis and rationale,” Nat. Renew. Energy Lab., Golden, CO, USA,
Tech. Rep. NREL/PR-540-42469, 2007.
[20] Ford C-MAX 2016 Hybrid Electric Vehicle. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ford.com/cars/cmax/, accessed Jan. 2016.
[21] A. Millner, “Modeling lithium ion battery degradation in electric vehi-
cles,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Innov. Technol. Efficient Rel. Elect. Supply
(CITRES), Waltham, MA, USA, Sep. 2010, pp. 349–356.
[22] L. T. Tian, S. L. Shi, and Z. Jia, “A statistical model for charging
power demand of electric vehicles,” Power Syst. Technol., vol. 4, no. 11,
pp. 126–130, 2010.
[23] P. M. Subcommittee, “IEEE reliability test system,” IEEE Trans. Power
App. Syst., vol. PAS-98, no. 6, pp. 2047–2054, Nov. 1979.
[24] R. Billinton and R. N. Allan, Reliability Evaluation of Power Systems,
2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Plenum Press, 1996.
Xue Wang (S’12) was born in China. She received
the B.E. and M.Sc. degrees from North China
Electric Power University, Baoding, China, in 2009
and 2012, respectively. She is currently pursuing the
M.Sc. degree with the University of Saskatchewan,
Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Rajesh Karki (S’98–M’00–SM’04) received
the B.E. degree from the National Institute of
Technology, Durgapur, India, and the M.Sc. and
Ph.D. degrees from the University of Saskatchewan,
Saskatoon, SK, Canada. He is currently an Associate
Professor with the Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, University of Saskatchewan.
He was a Lecturer at Tribhuvan University, Nepal.
He was also an Electrical Engineer at Nepal Hydro
and Electric, Udayapur Cement Industries, Nepal
Telecommunications Corporation, and General
Electric Canada, Peterborough, ON.