1

“Novel standalone plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Charging Station fed by solar
energy in presence of a fuel cell system used as supporting power source”
A technical report submitted to the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Khulna University of Engineering & Technology in the fulfillment of the requirements for the

“Course of EE 4130: Technical Seminar”

Journal: Renewable Energy

Impact Factor: 8.634
Publication Year: 2020
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.04.141

Authors:
Fulin He
Hassan Fathabadi

Submitted by
Majed
Roll:1803052

Date of submission: 16/05/2023

Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Khulna University of Engineering & Technology
Khulna – 9203, Bangladesh
 2

ABSTRACT
A novel standalone charging station (CS) fed by solar energy and a supporting fuel cell (FC) stack
has been built to charge electric vehicles (EVs). In addition to this, a novel maximum power point
tracking (MPPT) technique has been utilized to maximally extract electric power from
photovoltaic (PV) array used in the constructed CS. Battery bank is the important unit of a
conventional standalone CS that absorbs/produces extra electric power available/required in the
CS by charging/discharging itself. This is the main shortcoming of conventional standalone CSs
because battery bank is an expensive device that provides a lifetime shorter than normal when
it is utilized in a CS. This is because of the huge number of charge/discharge cycle that should be
conducted by it. In this work, to overcome this issue, the battery bank has been replaced with a
proposed FC system comprising a FC stack, an electrolyzer, two hydrogen tanks and a FC
controller. At any time when charge demand is greater than PV output power, the rest of demand
is supplied by the FC system. Vice versa, the electrolyzer absorbs extra PV output power and
produces hydrogen by extracting it from water when PV output power is greater than charge
demand. Experimental results and data recorded under normal operation of the built CS are
given. Compared to conventional standalone CSs, the contributions of the built CS are as follows.
First, the proposed FC system with permanent lifetime and a price of $39800 has been used as
substitute for battery banks with limited lifetime and being significantly more expensive
($140000 over 30 years). Second, a novel MPPT technique with adaptive step-size has been used
in the CS to extract maximum PV power. Third, the CS built in this research work not only is
standalone but also is only fed by solar energy, so it can be utilized in absence of electric grids
and negative effects such as air pollution.
 3

Table of Contents

1. Objectives................................................................................4

2. Introduction............................................................................4

3. Structural concepts ................................................................5

3.1. PV system and novel MPPT technique applied to it……………9

3.2. Fuel cell system ………….……………………….…………………….…….12

4. Constructed CS and experimental verification .....................13

5. Economical evaluation .........................................................17

6. Conclusion.............................................................................18

7. References…………..................................................................19
 4

1. OBJECTIVES
1. To design a standalone charging station fed by solar energy utilized in absence of grid
2. To introduce the charging station with backup of proposed Fuel cell system with permanent
lifetime substituting battery banks
3. To implement novel MPPT technique with adaptive step-size algorithm
4. To observe the results in different weather conditions and analyze the outcomes of the
proposed system
5. To evaluate the cost of the proposed system and comparison with respect to other existing
systems

2. INTRODUCTION
Utilization of various EV kinds, particularly plug-in hybrid electric cars (PHEV), has rapidly
expanded due to economic and environmental concerns [1, 2]. As a result, not only CSs are in
demand, but a variety of CSs are also in use today [3,4]. Grid-tied CSs are those that are connected
to electric networks and receive the majority of their power from there [5-7]. It is possible to
power a CS with both solar and electric power. Several simulated models of this type of CS have
been published in this regard [8-11]. Simulation was used to perform and validate the
minimization of cost and size for this category of CS [12,13]. Other computerized versions [14]
supply CS using a mix of wind and electric power. The remaining types described use electric,
solar, and wind energy to power CS [15]. All of the CSs described above are grid-tied, and the
vehicle-to-grid link makes it possible to charge and discharge EVs using the grid [16]. The use of
EVs as storage devices [17], controlling reactive power [18], regulating grid frequency [19,20],
enhancing grid quality [21], adjusting grid voltage [22], and harmonic reduction [23] are further
benefits of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) connections.
A CS which is not connected to a grid is called standalone CS. A shortcoming of a standalone CS
is its need to a battery bank being an expensive device that provides a lifetime shorter than
normal when it is used in a CS. This is because of the huge number of charge/discharge cycle that
should be conducted by it. In this paper, this problem is solved by introducing and utilizing a
proposed FC system with permanent lifetime and a price of $39800 as substitute for the battery
bank with limited lifetime and an overall cost of $140000 over 30 years [24]. A novel MPPT
technique with adaptive step-size has been used to extract maximum PV power from the PV array
of the CS built in this work. In addition to this, the CS not only is standalone but also is only
powered by solar energy that results in the capability of operating it in a remote area without
any negative environmental effect.
 5

3. STRUCTURAL CONCEPTS
In the first step, weather reports for the area where the CS was installed for a five-year period
(2012–2016) were evaluated. It was found that there are typically 269 cloudless days each year,
with an average sun radiation of roughly 875 W=m2 at noon. This fact led to the decision to
power the CS using solar energy, which is renewable and clean. The second phase involved
estimating the quantity of electricity (charge demand) that should be produced by the CS hour
by hour using information from questionnaires that owners of PHEVs within a 20 km radius of
the installation site filled out. A lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery's state of charge (SOC) can range from
1 (when the battery is fully charged) to 0 (when the battery is entirely discharged, or when the
battery is empty). A Li-ion battery's lifespan is considerably reduced when it is discharged when
its SOC is close to zero. The charge alarm in a PHEV is set off when the SOC of the battery
approaches 0.25 in order to avoid this problem and allow the driver ample time to reach a CS.
Since Li-ion batteries used in PHEVs typically have a 6.25 kWh capacity, when the battery's SOC
reaches 0.25, its capacity has decreased to 1.56 kWh, and it now requires 4.69 kWh to fully
recharge. In light of the fact that each PHEV requires approximately 5 kWh to charge, the daily
charge chart for the CS can be created by multiplying the number of PHEVs in Figure 1 by 5 kWh,
as shown in Figure 2.

Fig.1. PHEVs quantity

The charge demand over daylight should be met by the PV system, and the remaining demand
should be met by the FC system, as shown in Fig. 3. The CS is powered by a PV array and an FC
system. The demand peaks (20 kW) during daylight hours, hence a rated PV power of 24 kW is
 6

needed by accounting for a 20% overload. Since Fig. 3 also shows that demand is lower than 10
kW during the dark hours, the FC system's rated power should be 10 kW.

Fig.2. Daily charge chart

Additionally, the FC system functions as a backup power source, meeting the remaining demand
when charge demand exceeds PV output power. When PV output power exceeds charge
demand, the FC system's electrolyzer absorbs excess PV output power and generates hydrogen
by drawing it out of water. A high-pressure hydrogen tank with a capacity of 300 L at 500 Bar,
manufactured by Mahytec, is used as a backup hydrogen tank to provide hydrogen in the event
that the electrolyzer's hydrogen production is insufficient. The hydrogen produced by the
electrolyzer is stored in the hydrogen tank shown in Fig. 4. The amount of extra PV power
available in the CS during the day determines how much hydrogen is produced over the course
of a day, hence the amount of hydrogen produced each day varies. According to Fig. 4, the CS
consists of a 24 kW PV array, a converter connected to the array, a 10 kW FC stack, a converter,
a controller, two hydrogen tanks, and an electrolyzer for the fuel cell system. In addition to these,
a voltage regulator sets the dc-link voltage to a constant voltage and a converter connected to
the dc bus charges the PHEVs attached to the CS. Figure 4 shows how the PV array and the FC
stack are connected to the dc bus using converters with the names "PV converter" and "FC
converter," respectively”. Both converters are fly back type with similar electric circuit mainly
consisting of a MOSFET switch and a pulse transformer.
 7

Fig.3. Charge chart decomposed into two parts

The values of the components of the two converters are reported in Table 1 showing that
transformer turns ratio and the capacity of C1 are different in the two converters. Ratio of the
output voltage (dc-link voltage VDC) to the input voltage (Vin) of each converter, i.e., voltage gain
is formulated as:
𝑉𝐷𝐶 𝑛
= 1−𝐷 (1)
𝑉𝑖𝑛 𝑠

where, as shown in Fig. 5, n is the ratio of transformer turns, and Ds is the duty cycle of the switch
operation imposed on it via switching pulse fed to the gate of the switch. The CS is made up of a
PV system and an FC system, and this section analyzes each independently.
 8

Table 1
Details of the elements of the CS
TB-10000 FC stack PV and FC converters
Type PEM Cin (𝜇𝐹) 470
Rated power (W) 10000 Frequency (kHz) 25
DC output voltage (V) 48 Cdc (𝜇𝐹) 680
Weight (kg) 200 Vdc (V) 540
Max. temperature (◦C) 62 C2 (𝜇𝐹) 22
Dimensions (mm) 600 x 600 x 1900 C1 (𝜇𝐹) PV: 2.4, FC:3.6
Cooling system Forced air Transformer type Pulse
H2 pressure (bar) 0.45-0.55 ƞ1 & ƞ2 18/12 & 24/8
Reactants H2 & air Switch S1 IRFPS40N60K:
PV: x 4, FC: x 5
Flow rate at 10 kW (liter/min) 130 D1-D2 15ETH06S
Humidification Self-humidified PV array: 120 PV modules KC200GT
H2 purity 99.99% PV module KC200GT
External temperature (◦C) 4-32 MPP current (A) 7.61
Converter connected to PHEVs MPP voltage (V) 26.3
IGBT switches: Q3-Q6 STGY40NC60VD MPP power (W) 200.14
x 15
N4/N3 9/54 Short-circuit current (A) 8.21
Diodes D3-D10 40HF60 Open-circuit voltage (V) 32.9

Fig.4. Configuration of the CS

 9

Fig.5. PV and FC converters [25]

3.1. PV system and novel MPPT technique applied to it:

As depicted in Fig. 6, the PV system integrated within the CS consists of an MPPT device
connected to the PV converter, as well as a 24 kW PV array.
Below is a detailed formulation of the theoretical foundation explaining how the MPPT algorithm
functions. With reference to Figure 6, the 24 kW PV array's output power is estimated as follows:
𝑃𝑝𝑣 = 𝑉𝑝𝑣 𝐼𝑝𝑣 (2)

where the PV array's voltage and current, respectively, are Vpv and Ipv. Fig. 7 depicts the P-V
characteristic of the three portions (MPP, left side of MPP, and right side of MPP) 24 kW PV array.
Calculating power slope (𝛼𝑝𝑣 ) is as follows:
𝑑𝑃𝑝𝑣 ∆ 𝑃𝑝𝑣 𝑃𝑝𝑣 −𝑃𝑝𝑣 (𝑘−1)
𝛼𝑝𝑣 = 𝑑𝑉 = ∆ 𝑉 = 𝑉 (3)
𝑝𝑣 𝑝𝑣 𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)−𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘−1)

where k represents the quantity of measurements made by the MPPT device. The expansion of
Eq. (3) in terms of voltage and current is as follows:
𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)𝐼𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)−𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘−1)𝐼𝑝𝑣 (𝑘−1)
𝛼𝑝𝑣 = (4)
𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)−𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘−1)
 10

Fig.6. CS with details

Fig.7. P-V characteristic of the PV array

 11

Taking into considerations of figure-7, power slope gets the following values on three sections of
P-V characteristic:
(i) 𝛼𝑝𝑣 = 0 at the MPP

(ii) 𝛼𝑝𝑣 > 0 on the left of the MPP (5)

(iii) 𝛼𝑝𝑣 < 0 on the right of the MPP

Using Eq. (1), VPV is obtained as:

(1−𝐷𝑝 )𝑉𝑑𝑐
𝑉𝑃𝑉 = (6)
𝑛1

where n1 is the transformer turns ratio and DPV is the PV converter's duty cycle. Eq. (6)
demonstrates that VPV is adjusted to the voltage at MPP at any time by adjusting DPV, which is
conducted by the MPPT device, considering that Fig. 6 shows that a voltage regulator changes
Vdc to a constant value of 540 V in the manufactured CS. VPV(k) and IPV(k) are measured, as shown
in Fig. 8, and 𝛼𝑝𝑣 is computed using Eq. (4).

Then, DPV is recalculated, adjusted, and modified using the unique adaptive step-size MPPT
algorithm represented by the equation below:
𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝
𝐷𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) = 𝐷𝑝𝑣 (𝑘) − 𝛼𝑝𝑣 𝑃 (7)
𝑚𝑝𝑝

where 𝑃𝑚𝑝𝑝 and 𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝 represent the power and voltage at MPP, respectively, as measured under
standard circumstances (solar radiation of 1000 W/m2 and array temperature of 25֯ C). According
to Fig. 7, 𝑃𝑚𝑝𝑝 and 𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝 for the 24 kW PV array are 𝑃𝑚𝑝𝑝 24 kW and 𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝 157.8 V. Equation (6)
is expressed as follows in discrete form:
[1−𝐷𝑝𝑣 (𝑘+1)]𝑉𝑑𝑐
𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) = (8)
𝑛1

PV voltage is calculated by substituting 𝐷𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) from Eq. (7) into Eq. (8) as:
𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝
[1−𝐷𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)+𝛼𝑝𝑣 ]𝑉
𝑃𝑚𝑝𝑝 𝑑𝑐
𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) = (9)
𝑛1

Eq. (9) shows that PV voltage is changed to track voltage at MPP by modifying DPV as:
𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝 𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝
[1+𝛼𝑝𝑣 ]𝑉 𝛼𝑝𝑣 𝑉𝑑𝑐
[1−𝐷𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)]𝑉𝑑𝑐 𝑃𝑚𝑝𝑝 𝑑𝑐 𝑃𝑚𝑝𝑝
𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) = + = 𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘) + (10)
𝑛1 𝑛1 𝑛1

Equation 10 demonstrates:
For (i) at MPP we have, 𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) = 𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)

For (ii) on the left of MPP we have, 𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) > 𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)
 12

For (iii) on the right of MPP we have, 𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘 + 1) < 𝑉𝑝𝑣 (𝑘)

The above three points prove the correct manner used in the proposed MPPT technique.

Fig. 8. MPPT flowchart.

3.2. Fuel cell system:

Noting According to Fig. 6, the controller measures Vdc, charge current (Ichar), the output currents
of the PV and FC converters (Iout-pv and Iout-fc), and the electrolyzer's input current (Ielec). The
controller then calculates charge power (Pchar), the output powers of the PV and FC converters
(Pout-pv and Pout-fc), and the input power of the electrolyzer (Pelec) as:
 13

𝑃𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 = 𝑉𝑑𝑐 𝐼𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟

𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑝𝑣 = 𝑉𝑑𝑐 𝐼𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑝𝑣

𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑓𝑐 = 𝑉𝑑𝑐 𝐼𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑓𝑐

𝑃𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐 = 𝑉𝑑𝑐 𝐼𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐

(11)
By comparing the values computed, one of the following two cases is executed by the controller
at any time:
1) If 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑝𝑣 ≥ 𝑃𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 + 𝑃𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐 , the FC stack is made inactive by the controller

2) If 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑝𝑣 ≥ 𝑃𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 + 𝑃𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐 , the FC stack is made active by the controller to generate the
rest of power needed to response charge demand

Power balance can be formulated as, 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑝𝑣 + 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑓𝑐 = 𝑃𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 + 𝑃𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐 (12)

The amount of output power of the FC converter needed to respond demand:

𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑓𝑐 = 𝑃𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟 + 𝑃𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐 − 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡−𝑝𝑣
𝑉𝑑𝑐 2
= 𝑅𝐿

(1−𝐷𝑓𝑐 )2 𝑉𝑑𝑐 2
= (13)
𝑛2 2 𝑅𝑖𝑛

where 𝑅𝐿 is the dc bus resistance, 𝐷𝑓𝑐 is the duty cycle, 𝑛2 is the turns ratio of the switch and
transformer used in the FC converter and 𝑅𝑖𝑛 is the converter input resistance.
Equation (13) demonstrates the controller modifies 𝐷𝑓𝑐 to adjust the output power of the FC
converter to the amount as per demand.

4. CONSTRUCTED CS AND EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION

The electrical circuit of the CS created in this work is shown on Fig. 9. MC68HC11E9, a
microcontroller, has been programmed to implement the MPPT algorithm and carry out power
control tasks. In Table 1, each component of the CS is listed. The CS was constructed using a 24
kW PV array consisting of 20 parallel-tied panels, each made up of six series-tied PV modules
KC200GT, and a 10 kW TB-10000 PEM FC stack.
A standard test was first conducted, and the waveform of electric power extracted from one 200
W PV module KC200GT by the MPPT device was recorded and shown in fig. 10 in order to assess
 14

the proposed adaptive step-size MPPT algorithm's accuracy and compare it with other widely
used MPPT techniques. The power waveform confirms that the tracking time was 12 milliseconds
and that 199.2 W of the 200.14 W (MPP power given in Table 1) had been extracted, giving an
MPPT efficiency of 99.6%. Table 2 compares the proposed MPPT technique with the fixed step-
size and variable step-size MPPT methods typically employed in conventional solar-powered CSs.
The comparison demonstrates unequivocally that the suggested MPPT technique is superior, and
as a result, the CS developed in this work is more effective than conventional CSs.
Two independent sets of measurements were made in order to test the CS's performance in
various scenarios and to monitor power. A clear day with solar radiation of 996 W/m2 at midday
was used for the first round of measurements. Hour by hour, the power outputs of all the CS
units were recorded and are shown in Fig. 11. According to the data, the controller turned off the
FC stack whenever the charge demand was less than the PV output power, or between 9:00 and
18:00. The remaining PV power was then absorbed by the electrolyzer, which produced hydrogen
by drawing it out of water at certain times. The measurement also revealed that the electrolyzer's
daily production of hydrogen was stored in the hydrogen tank as 12.6 L at 500 Bar. Similar to this,
whenever the demand exceeded the PV output power, the controller activated the FC stack to
generate enough power to meet the need.

Table 2
Comparing the novel MPPT technique used in the constructed CS with MPPT methods used in
conventional CSs
MPPT Perturb & Modified Modified Adaptive Incremental Seeking This
method Observe Incremental genetic fuzzy conductance control work
Variable Conductance algorithm
Step-size
Tracking 15 ≥ 200 ≥ 600 120 81 33 12
time (ms)
MPPT 96 Not 96-99 Not 95 97 ≥ 99.6
efficiency reported reported
 15

Fig.9. Constructed CS: Electronic circuit

Fig.10. Power extraction of a PV module KC200GT (the MPPT device

starts at t=0 and solar radiation = 1000 W/m-2)
 16

Fig.11. Power measured on a cloudless day

Fig.12. Power measured on a cloudy day

 17

The second series of measurements was carried out at midday on a cloudy day with 581 W/m2
of solar radiation, and the power outputs of all the CS units were once more measured hour by
hour. These results are shown in Fig. 12. The controller activated the FC stack to turn on enough
power to meet the demand because the charge demand was higher throughout the day than the
PV output power. The two sets of measurements' findings, which are displayed in Figs. 11 and
12, clearly show how the constructed CS responds to charge demand under various weather
circumstances.

5. ECONOMICAL EVALUATION
The 10 kW TB-10000 PEM FC stack, an electrolyzer, two hydrogen tanks, and an FC converter
make up the FC system integrated into the CS. It costs $39800 and has been utilized as a Li-ion
battery bank replacement. Additionally, due to its clean operation in a closed loop cycle, it has
an eternal lifespan free from any negative environmental effects. In more detail, the electrolyzer
breaks down water into oxygen and hydrogen in order to produce hydrogen. After that, the
hydrogen is kept and used by the FC stack to produce electricity. Hydrogen and oxygen are
combined during power generation to create water, which is then used in the electrolyzer to
produce hydrogen.
At a specific depth of discharge (DoD), a factor called "cycle life" determines how long a battery
will last. The cycle life of a battery is a number that indicates the maximum number of charge
and discharge cycles that may be carried out by the battery over the course of its lifespan. DoD
stands for the ratio of the battery's discharged capacity to its nominal capacity. In comparison to
lead acid batteries, which have a cycle life of 800–1000 cycles, Li-ion batteries have a cycle life
that ranges from 4000 to 7000 cycles. Due to its limited lifespan, a lead acid battery bank cannot
be used in a CS, hence Li-ion battery banks are currently employed in standalone CSs. A TB-10000
PEM FC stack is used in the proposed FC system to generate 10 kW of electrical power in the built
CS. The proposed FC system should be compared with two 6.5 kWh Li-ion battery banks linked in
parallel or series, failing that, with a single 6.5 kWh Li-ion battery bank with cycle life at 80% DoD.
The developed CS system uses two 6.5 kWh Li-ion battery banks, which are charged and
discharged roughly ten times daily instead of the FC system. The two battery bank’s combined
lifespan will therefore be roughly 1.5 years. It will need 40 battery banks to power the completed
CS for 30 years, costing a total of 40 x 3500 = $140000. A battery bank also has an adverse impact
on the environment because it releases some components, such plastic, when its useful life is
through. The proposed 10 kW FC system is contrasted in Table 3 with two 6.5 kWh Liion battery
banks LG Chem RESU that can produce the same rated power (10 kW) at 80% DoD when
connected in parallel or series. The FC system costs $39800, which is significantly less than the
cost of the two Li-ion battery banks over 30 years ($140000). Additionally, as previously said, the
FC system has no adverse environmental effects, whereas Li-ion battery banks have so many
negative effects. The following table gives an estimate of how much each component of the CS
will cost to build. The cost for the PV component is $35,000. The cost for the FC system is $39800.
 18

Approximately $113800 is spent overall. The CS exclusively uses solar (renewable) energy, thus
the government contributed $45500, making the total investment roughly $6830. The CS has
been operating since July 2016, and measurements taken over the course of a year, together
with accounting for 9 days when it was unable to function owing to preventive maintenance and
inevitable repairs, show that its average daily production of electric energy has been around 170
kWh. Given that the electric energy was sold for $42 per 100 kWh, the annual income was almost
$26,000, indicating a payback period of just 31 months. It is evident that other traditional
standalone and grid-tied CSs periodically fail to service as well due to inescapable mending and
preventive maintenance. Table 4 lists the benefits and drawbacks of the built-in CS in order to
give a succinct yet thorough summary on them.
Table 3
Comparing the FC system used in the constructed CS with two 6.5 kWh Li-ion battery banks
used in conventional CSs
Device Cost Negative environmental effect Lifetime
Proposed 10 kW FC system $39800 No Permanent
Two 6.5 kWh Li-ion battery banks $140000 Yes 500 days

Table 4
Constructed CS: Advantages/disadvantage
Advantage Disadvantage

Solar energy can be increased by adding to the Regular maintenance is required

number of PV modules High pressure hydrogen tanks should be far from fire
No battery bank Electrolyzer should be safely installed
No negative environmental effect Investment of $68300 with a payback period of only
Investment of $68300 with a payback period of only 31 months
31 months V2G technology is not supported
High efficiency of 99.6%
Capable of installing with the absence of grid

6. CONCLUSION
It was realized and built an innovative freestanding CS powered entirely by solar energy as
renewable energy. Two 6.5 kWh Li-ion battery banks that provided the same rated power (10
kW) at 80% DoD during discharge with a shorter lifetime of only 500 days in the CS and imposing
a cost of about $140000 over 30 years were replaced by a 10 kW FC system with a permanent
life time and an overall cost of $39800. The proposed unique MPPT technique with adaptable
step-size used in the CS, as well as the theoretical notions for accomplishing it, were given step
by step. The measurements made while the CS was working in various weather situations
(cloudless and cloudy days) were provided, demonstrating the CS's effectiveness in responding
to charge demand under various weather scenarios.
 19

The CS may be built without a grid because it is not only self-contained but also powered by solar
energy. As a result, it has no adverse environmental effects. The use of a proposed 10 kW FC
system has been made since it is more cost-effective than using two 6.5 kWh Li-ion battery banks.
Due to the use of a cutting-edge MPPT technique with a convergence time and MPPT efficiency
of 12 ms and 99.6%, the CS is highly efficient. These three points represent the uniqueness and
contributions of the CS examined and constructed in this study in comparison to those available.
Future work could include using solar energy in addition to other renewable energy sources to
power the built CS.

7. REFERENCES
[1] H. Fathabadi, Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs): Replacing internal combustion engine
with clean and renewable energy based auxiliary power sources, IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics 33 (11) (2018) 9611e9618.
[2] H. Fathabadi, Novel battery/photovoltaic hybrid power source for plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles, Solar Energy 159 (2018) 243e250.
[3] H. Fathabadi, Novel wind powered electric vehicle charging station with vehicle-to-grid (V2G)
connection capability, Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 229e239.
[4] H. Fathabadi, Novel solar powered electric vehicle charging station with the capability of
vehicle-to-grid, Solar Energy 142 (2017) 136e143.
[5] Q. Dong, D. Niyato, P. Wang, Z. Han, The PHEV charging scheduling and power supply
optimization for charging stations, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 65 (2) (2016) 566e580.
[6] H. Fathabadi, Novel grid-connected solar/wind powered electric vehicle charging station with
vehicle-to-grid technology, Energy 132 (2017) 1e11.
[7] L. Luo, W. Gu, Z. Wu, S. Zhou, Joint planning of distributed generation and electric vehicle
charging stations considering real-time charging navigation, Appl. Energy 242 (2019) 1274e1284.
[8] P. Goli, W. Shireen, PV powered smart charging station for PHEVs, Renew. Energy 66 (2014)
280e287.
[9] M. Brenna, A. Dolara, F. Foiadelli, S. Leva, M. Longo, Urban scale photovoltaic charging
stations for electric vehicles, IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 5 (2014) 1234e1241.
[10] P. Nunes, T. Farias, M.C. Brito, Day charging electric vehicles with excess solar electricity for
a sustainable energy system, Energy 80 (2015) 263e274.
[11] G.R. Chandra Mouli, P. Bauer, M. Zeman, System design for a solar powered electric vehicle
charging station for workplaces, Appl. Energy 168 (2016) 434e443.
 20

[12] K. Seddig, P. Jochem, W. Fichtner, Two-stage stochastic optimization for costminimal

charging of electric vehicles at public charging stations with photovoltaics, Appl. Energy 242
(2019) 769e781.
[13] D.Q. Hung, Z.Y. Dong, H. Trinh, Determining the size of PHEV charging stations powered by
commercial grid-integrated PV systems considering reactive power support, Appl. Energy 183
(2016) 160e169.
[14] P. Goli, W. Shireen, Wind powered smart charging facility for PHEVs, IEEE Energy Conversion
Cong. Exposition (ECCE 2014) (2014) 1986e1991.
[15] H. Li, H. Liu, A. Ji, F. Li, Y. Jia, Design of a hybrid solar-wind powered charging station for
electric vehicles, in: 2013 International Conference on Materials for Renewable Energy and
Environment (ICMREE 2013), 2013, pp. 977e981.
[16] M. Yilmaz, P.T. Krein, Review of the impact of vehicle-to-grid technologies on distribution
systems and utility interfaces, IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 28 (12) (2013) 5673e5689.
[17] S. Habib, M. Kamran, U. Rashid, Impact analysis of vehicle-to-grid technology and charging
strategies of electric vehicles on distribution networkseA review, J. Power Sources 277 (2015)
205e214.
[18] M.C. Kisacikoglu, B. Ozpineci, L.M. Tolbert, EV/PHEV bidirectional charger assessment for
V2G reactive power operation, IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 28 (12) (2013) 5717e5727.
[19] H. Liu, Z. Hu, Y. Song, J. Lin, Decentralized vehicle-to-grid control for primary frequency
regulation considering charging demands, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28 (3) (2013) 3480e3489.
[20] S. Han, S. Han, K. Sezaki, Development of an optimal vehicle-to-grid aggregator for frequency
regulation, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 1 (1) (2010) 65e72.
[21] M. Falahi, H.M. Chou, M. Ehsani, L. Xie, K.L. Butler-Purry, Potential power quality benefits of
electric vehicles, IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 4 (4) (2013) 1016e1023.
[22] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, J. Driesen, The impact of vehicle-to-grid on the distribution grid,
Elec. Power Syst. Res. 81 (1) (2011) 185e192.
[23] J.R. Pillai, B. Bak-Jensen, Integration of vehicle-to-grid in the Western Danish power system,
IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2 (1) (2011) 12e19.
[24] N. Narayan, T. Papakosta, V. Vega-Garita, Z. Qin, J. Popovic-Gerber, P. Bauer, M. Zeman,
Estimating battery lifetimes in Solar Home System design using a practical modelling
methodology, Appl. Energy 228 (2018) 1629e1639.
[25] H. Fathabadi, Novel high efficiency DC/DC boost converter for using in photovoltaic systems,
Sol. Energy 125 (2016) 22e31.