Received: 23 June 2023

DOI: 10.1049/stg2.12156

REVIEW
- -
Revised: 27 December 2023 Accepted: 12 January 2024

- IET Smart Grid

Impact of EV charging on electrical distribution network and

mitigating solutions – A review

Inam Nutkani1 | Hamish Toole1 | Nuwantha Fernando1 | Loh Poh Chiang Andrew2

1
School of Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Abstract
Technology (RMIT) University, Melbourne, Victoria,
Australia
Rapidly increasing uptake of Electric Vehicles (EVs) is expected to have a significant
2
impact on electrical power distribution networks. Considerable work has been carried out
Department of Electronic Engineering, The Chinese
University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, to understand this impact and quantify the distribution networks hosting capacity, with
Hong Kong and without network management solutions. However, the current body of knowledge
does not have a comprehensive review of the research done to‐date on this topic which is
Correspondence vital to understand the scope of the existing studies, the data used in analysing the impact,
Inam Nutkani. and, most importantly, the findings. A comprehensive yet focused review of impact of EV
Email: [email protected]
charging on distribution networks is presented by delving into the main factors restricting
EV hosting capacity and the strategies used to maximise EV hosting capacity by man-
aging the aforementioned impacts. The authors comprehensively summarise the ap-
proaches used to quantify the impact, network and data types, and the proposed solutions
to increase network hosting capacity. Moreover, the shortcomings in the existing work are
identified and recommendations for future research are provided to help stakeholders
understand the current state‐of‐the‐art, make informed decisions, and to be considered
by future researchers.

KEYWORDS
distribution networks, electric vehicle charging, electric vehicles, energy demand, storage, and EVs, power
distribution control, power distribution planning, power grids, renewable energy sources, smart power grids,
transportation

1 | INTRODUCTION this decade [2, 3]. This expected increase has warranted im-
mediate action to investigate the impact of EVs on the power
Global warming driven by the transportation sector accounts grid and possible solutions to facilitate faster adoption of EVs,
for 24% [1] of global CO2 emissions. This has coerced gov- preferably without or with minimal grid infrastructure
ernments to mandate a reduction of new Internal‐Combustion upgrades.
Engine (ICE) powered vehicles in the coming decade. This Numerous studies suggest that the imminent trans-
paradigm shift in transportation fuel sources to electromobility formation due to EVs and Distributed Generation (DGs) will
is expected to have a rapid increase in power demand, hence fundamentally reshape the design and operation power dis-
posing a significant challenge to already overstretched power tribution systems, creating new opportunities across various
networks across the globe. According to the forecasts, EVs are fronts [3]. According to a report by the International Energy
expected to reach 50% of global new car sales by the end of Agency (IEA) [4], global network demand could experience

Abbreviations: CHP, Combined Heat and Power; DG, Distributed Generation; DNSP, Distribution Network Service Provider; DSM, Demand Side Management; EV, Electric Vehicle;
HC, Hosting Capacity; HVAC, Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning; ICE, Internal Combustion Engine; IEA, International Energy Agency; IEC, International Electrotechnical
Commission; IEEE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; LV, Low Voltage; MV, Medium Voltage; NL, Net Load; NREL, National Renewable Energy Laboratory; NSW,
New South Wales; NV, Network Voltage; PV, Photovoltaic; RBTS, Roy Billinton Test System; SOC, State of Charge; TC, Thermal Capacity; TOU, Time of Use; V2G, Vehicle‐to‐grid;
VUF, Voltage Unbalance Factor.
[Correction added on 4 October 2024, after first online publication. The reference 71, and its citations are deleted from the article.]

-
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited and no modifications or adaptations are made.
© 2024 The Authors. IET Smart Grid published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Institution of Engineering and Technology.

IET Smart Grid. 2024;7:485–502. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/stg2 485

 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
486
- NUTKANI ET AL.

5% to 10% increase at a 30% EV penetration by 2030, quantitative analysis of the results and findings. Similarly, re-
particularly pronounced in countries with high EV adoption searchers in [13] have evaluated the impact of EVs on grid
such as Norway and Netherlands. Another report from Na- stability and economics, focusing on challenges associated with
tional Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) [5] indicates non‐stationary and managed loads. The article focuses on the
that in the United States, the network demand could poten- planning of charging infrastructure and operation strategies of
tially rise by approximately 0.35% for every 1% EV penetra- EVs, yet it lacks quantification of the impact. Other review
tion increase by the year 2050. It is important to note that articles, such as refs. [14, 15] have analysed the impact of
these estimates offer a high‐level overview and may do not existing charger configuration on power quantity and reviewed
account for factors such as future vehicle compositions and existing case studies dealing specifically with distribution
charging regimes. network voltage and peak demand, with brief discussions on
The extent of demand increase varies significantly based on EV impact mitigating solutions. While these existing review
the existing demand, charging practices, and assessment articles and their consolidated findings are insightful, a
methodology, as discussed in the later section of this paper. comprehensive review of EVs impact on the distribution
Research articles specifically focused on the impact of EVs and works, including data types, methodologies, trend, quantitative
hosting capacity further suggest that most electrical networks, results, associated impact mitigation solutions, and immediate
in their current state, can host EVs in a 10%–60% penetration future research trends and needs, have not been conclusively
range under the present unregulated EV charging regime. articulated. This paper aims to address these shortcomings and
Many of these studies adopted a model‐based approach, uti- specific aspects. The key contributions of this paper are:
lising a specific real‐world or IEEE bus network model and a
specific time‐varying EVs demand profile [6]. While model‐ � Presents a comprehensive review of the latest research on
based approach accurately captures the impact, their applica- the impact of EVs on distribution networks and offer
bility is limited to the networks with similar characteristics. The insight into the proposed approaches, their benefits, limi-
ability to generalise these approaches is introduced by sto- tations, and emerging needs. This includes an assessment of
chastic approaches, where EVs charging uncertainties are taken the diverse networks and data types employed in different
into account [7, 8]. Moreover, the research suggests that con- studies.
straints on network hosting capacity can be overcome and � Presents a conclusive summary of case studies, both quan-
increased by up to 100% with appropriate mitigation solutions, titative and qualitative findings and reported results of EV
such as smart or regulated EV charging, reported to be the impact on distribution network load demand, operating
most effective method [9, 10]. This is followed by the active voltage, assets thermal capacity and network hosting
management of EVs and DGs [11] with network orchestration capacity.
being the costliest solution. Further insight into the various � Presents a thorough review and classification of various
solutions and their relative effectiveness are presented in the strategies used for EV impact mitigation, highlighting their
later section of the paper. current state and effectiveness in practice along with the
Moreover, the research articles, particularly, the review associated hurdles.
papers have identified that the network thermal‐capacity and � Summaries the shortcomings identified in existing research
voltage stability are the primary factors constraining the and provides recommendations by highlighting trends and
network EV hosting capacity, as summarised in Figure 1. In immediate future research needs.
contrast, supply power quality and network short‐circuit levels
are the secondary factors and are less likely to constrain the
network's ability to host EV. For example, the benefits and
issues associated with the EVs reported in different studies are 1.1 | Paper structure
summarised in [12]. However, this lakes insight into the types
of data, methodologies employed, and a comparative The paper is organised as follows:

FIGURE 1 The key factors constraining the hosting capacity of EVs.

 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 487

Section – 2 define the hosting capacity and highlights its charging of EVs to minimise network load demand, ensuring a
significance to power distribution network, emphasizing the more balanced and efficient operation of the network.
need for the critical review presented in this paper. Active Management of EVs and Distributed Genera-
Section – 3 reviews articles reporting the impact of EVs tion: This solution actively controls and coordinates the
on distribution network, particularly focusing on aspects such charging and discharging of EVs and dispatch of DGs to
as increase in load demand, thermal loading of assets, and manage network load demand. It may involve operating EVs
operating voltage of the network. This section also evaluates and DGs in specific control mode to avoid overload, regulate
and compares various factors considered in each study, voltage and/enhance EVs, DGs and network efficiency.
including approaches, data types and EVs charging Network Management: This solution involves the con-
behaviour. trol of network assets and/or its configuration, ensuring effi-
Section – 4 provides a comprehensive review of research cient and reliable operation of the distribution network.
on solutions proposed to mitigate the impact of EVs. Examples include monitoring network transformer and
Section – 5 summarises the findings, highlights any feeders, scheduling their maintenance, or reconfiguring the
shortcomings identified in the research, and provides specific network.
recommendations for future research. Network Orchestration: This solution primarily involves
the physical upgrade of the network. Although costly, it offers
a sophisticated and effective means of maintaining a well‐
2 | EVS IMPACT, HOSTING CAPACITY functioning distribution network.
AND MITIGATING SOLUTION – Extensive research has been undertaken by both the re-
DEFINITION AND SIGNIFICANCE searchers and industry with primary goal to comprehend the
impact of EVs and subsequently develop EVs impact miti-
EVs Impact: EVs are anticipated to exert a substantial and gating solutions and policies to facilitate EV integration
potentially adverse impact on the electrical distribution net- without negatively affecting the network design and operation.
works, especially in comparison to other segments of the grid However, individual study results often lack generality and a
system, given their direct connection at the distribution level. clear understanding of their limitations in different scenario or
Particularly, the charging demand of EVs at a certain pene- networks. This variability arises from approaches and datasets
tration level can lead to violation of the thermal limits of used in each study. In the literature, the different approaches
distribution feeders and transformers, resulting in their and specific techniques are adopted to analyse EV hosting
reduced lifespan. Additionally, the network peak demand may capacity and impact mitigating solutions, as briefly defined
rise, contributing to increased uncertainty and adversely below:
affecting the market economic operation and grid stability. Deterministic Approach: Analyses fixed or specific sce-
Another significant impact and constraint pertains to primary narios of network and EVs penetration, along with their load,
operating voltage of the networks, which can go beyond to predict the deterministic effect of EVs on the network.
thresholds at certain EV penetration levels due to increased Studies largely relying on fixed or specific scenarios of network
power flow and subsequent voltage drop in the network. and EV loads in the analysis are classified “deterministic” in
Furthermore, under certain circumstances, EVs may have a this study.
more pronounced effect on secondary voltage than the pri- Stochastic Approach: Unlike deterministic approach, the
mary voltage due to increased network short‐circuit levels and stochastic approach accounts for uncertainties associated with
deteriorated power quality resulting from harmonics produced network or EV load. This approach analyses uncertainties
by the EV chargers. All these factors, individually or collec- associated with the network and EVs penetration, along with
tively, determine “Network EV Hosting Capacity” which is their load, to estimate the probabilistic effect of EVs on the
fundamentally defined as follows: network. Studies using probabilistic load models for EVs and/
Network EV Hosting Capacity: The maximum level of or network and using probabilistic techniques such as Monte
EV integration that a distribution network can effectively Carlo simulations are classified “stochastic” in this study.
accommodate without compromising its reliability, efficiency, Heuristic or Experimental Approach: This approach
or performance [16]. analyses experimental or measured data from the network and
Network EV hosting capacity is a crucial metric as it EVs to predict the effect of EVs on the network. Studies
gauges the network's ability to handle the growing charging relying primarily on empirical, or field data are classified as
demand of EVs while maintaining optimal functionality. “heuristic” category in this study.
However, the hosting capacity of networks is inherently con- In addition to these broad approaches, specific model and
strained by their design and existing operating states, necessi- technique are used to analyse EV hosting capacity. The system
tating the implementation of one of the EV impact mitigating is either mathematically modelled referred to as “analytical” or
solutions reported in the literature. A brief overview of key build using the blocks/libraries in the specialised software
mitigating solutions on the impact of EVs, which will be dis- termed as “simulation” later. Additionally, specific techniques
cussed later in this paper, includes: such as load flow algorithms, optimisation algorithms, statis-
Regulated/Smart/Dynamic Charging of EVs: This tical tools, or machine learning‐based prediction methods and
approach employs intelligent scheduling or reduced power more are used. A systematic analysis and classification of
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
488
- NUTKANI ET AL.

different studies on EV hosting capacity and their mitigating differences in the assumed scenarios for base load, number of
solution are crucial to fully comprehend the results and merits EVs per household and charging regime.
and demerits associated with different approaches. This paper Moreover, the increased peak demand due to EVs may
aims to provide valuable insight to both researchers and in- occur for a fraction of the time [29], and can vary based on the
dustry professionals in relation to the state‐of‐the‐art, ap- climate and local driving patterns. For example, peak demand
proaches, the findings and, assisting them in prioritising their for charging may also occur during weekends and holidays,
focus and research effort effectively. when people are more likely to take long drives and need to
charge their EVs more frequently. Unless it is addressed
through a mitigation strategy, these peak demand conditions
3 | REVIEW OF EVS IMPACT ON are unavoidable and will require a significant amount of
DISTRIBUTION NETWORK network reinforcement on LV networks to deal with a modest
EV uptake [30].
This section reviews the EVs primary impacts reported in the
literature to‐date, as briefly categorised in Figure 1 and further
summarised with details in Table 1. 3.2 | Voltage stability

The load demand increase due to EVs has a direct and detri-
3.1 | Network demand/loading mental impact on distribution network voltage and its ability to
maintain voltage within permissible limits, for example, within
The increase in EV penetration is estimated to have a pro- þ10% to −6% as per International Electrotechnical Com-
portionate rise in system load demand. An example of this mission IEC 60038 standard [31]. The network voltage limit is
load demand increase is shown in Figure 2 for a medium one of the key factors constraining the EV hosting capacity of
density urban network (#11) comprising 1264 households the network and majority of past research have focused on this
[17] when all household EVs are charged using the real aspect.
charging pattern from of EV trial data [18]. As such, it Several studies have analysed the impact of EV penetration
presents a new challenge furthering the need for a delicate load on network operating voltage and reported that voltage
balance between supply and demand, particularly when the violates during peak load hours. For instance, the authors in ref.
market is also in transition due to the rapid increase of solar [27] use the RBTS‐5 test system to analyse the impact of EVs
PV and storage systems. on residential and commercial feeders where network lower
The impact of EVs on distribution network demand has voltage limit breaches occur in the evening peak for the resi-
been reported through various studies. The authors in ref. [19] dential feeders. This study also analyses the EVs load impact on
used real charging data from 64 different EV types to evaluate similarly sized road network voltage considering different
the impact on the distribution network in California. The study commutes and EVs state‐of‐charge (SOC) where the network
has reported that moderate uptake of 30% EV penetration voltage limit breaches at the start of the workday for the
results in an increase of peak demand by 6%, from 4300 MW commercial feeders under modest EV uptake in the network.
up to 4600 MW. A similar moderate demand increase is also The study presented in ref. [21] uses a digital model of the
reported in ref. [20] for the distribution network in South Egyptian distribution network and reports the same voltage
China, where the probabilistic model of EVs charging profiles stress on the network during the evening. Similarly, the research
are developed based on the real EV charging data of a large presented in ref. [32] uses 15 different probabilistic EV charging
number of mixed fleets. The studies presented in refs. [21, 22] profiles from the transport survey data and evaluates the voltage
have reported a proportionate increase in demand due to EV profile, reaffirming the previous finding that load demand in-
penetration. For instance, the authors of ref. [21] report a one‐ crease due to EVs cause the network voltage to violate the limits
on‐one increase in load demand due to EVs, where the RBTS2 in the evening peak, at their moderate penetration level. In
standard test model is used to quantify the demand increase. addition, numerous studies [22, 23, 27, 28, 33–39] have analysed
These results have been validated using a digital twin of an the impact of EV load on network operating voltage or change
existing distribution network in Egypt. in operating voltage, as summarised in Table 3. The results
In contrast, some studies report an aggressive increase in obtained from these studies vary in a wide range because each
network load demand considering the least likely but worst‐ study is unique and conducted using different distribution net-
case scenarios. The network load demand is estimated to works and EV profiles. Moreover, the definition of EV pene-
double when EV charging time is confined between 20:30 to tration level in different literature differs too. To understand the
22:00 of the day, precisely coinciding with the peak load de- reported impact, the results have been categorised based on the
mand [26], triple when 4 EVs per household are assumed [27], level of impact and presented in ascending order of per‐unit (p.
and increase by a factor of four when the assumed base load is u) voltage change caused by every 1% EV penetration.
small compared to EVs charging power and simultaneous In summary, EVs at their 100% penetration can change the
plug‐in of all the EVs [28]. The results summarised in Table 2 MV networks voltage in 0.02 pu to 0.05 pu range, and LV
showcase a considerable variation in the forecasted increase in networks voltage in 0.1 pu to 0.15 pu range under most sce-
demand, ranging from 6% to 500%, likely due to the vast narios, and up to 0.25 pu to 0.3 pu under the worst‐case
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 489

TABLE 1 Consolidated summary of literature analysing EVs impact on distribution network.

Type of
Ref/Year/Location impact Data source Network/Model Voltage Comments/Key findings
[19]/2016/Los Angles USA NL Real Charging load model N/A Used small sample size, 90% of charging events below
9.1 kWh, resulted in 6% increase in demand.

[20]/2020/Yangjiang, China NL Hybrid Monte ‐Carlo N/A Unregulated charging led to increased network loading,
simulation typically during the peak hours

[21]/2017/Cairo/Egypt NL Hybrid RBTS‐bus‐2/ShC‐D8 LV/MV Uncoordinated EV charging resulted in network assets

test systems overloading and a drop in system voltage.
NV Coordinated charging considerably mitigated these
impacts
TC

[22]/2021/Kajang, Malaysia NL Synthetic 11 kV distribution MV In the Malaysian context, the thermal loading of network
network model assets is the main constraining factor under most EV
NV
charging scenarios.
TC

[23]/2019/Surat, India NL Synthetic IEEE‐13 node test LV/MV Increased voltage violations with increased EV uptake
feeder
NV

[26]/2019/Santa Cat., Brazil NL Hybrid Monte‐Carlo LV Peak demand increased by 82% at 40% EV uptake
simulation
TC

[27]/2016/Brookings USA NL Synthetic RBTS‐bus 5 MV/HV Uncontrolled charging led to undervoltage

NV

[28]/2018/Skopje Macedonia NL Synthetic Network model LV Hosting capacity is significantly impacted due to fast‐
distribution powered chargers under uncoordinated charging
NV
network (LV side) conditions.
HC

[33]/2020/Montreal, CAN NV Synthetic IEEE‐33 bus Radial MV Increased uptake of level 2 charging systems significantly
distribution feeder impacted the network's ability to maintain voltage
with regulatory limits

[34]/2021/Porto, Portugal NV Hybrid Digital twin LV LV Voltage impacts are largely dependent on the location of
Suburban network the feeder

[35]/2020/Magdeburg, Germany NL Hybrid LV distribution LV Concluded: The single‐phase nature of most household
network model EV charging loads resulted in a significant voltage
NV
unbalance
[36]/2021/Brussels, Belgium NV Synthetic Typical LV grid LV Increased EV uptake primarily resulted in overloading of
transformers and voltage derivations along the
feeders in most parts of the network

[37]/2019/Melbourne, Australia NV Real IEEE‐33 bus Radial LV Timing of voltage violations differ for industrial and
distribution feeder residential networks

[38]/2016/Manchester UK TC Hybrid Digital twin, Monte‐ LV Peak demand increases by 150% under 100%
Carlo simulation penetration rate, thermal constraints observed at
NV
40% EV penetration
[32]/2021/Gazipur, Bangladesh NL Hybrid MV residential feeder MV Seasonal demand variations significantly impacts EV
uptake, allowing for a substantial variation in hosting
NV
capacity across the year..
HC

[39]/2021/Kansas, USA NV Real IEEE‐123 BUS LV/MV Increased EV uptake resulted in voltage variations and
violations, and significant level of voltage unbalance
observed at at 50% EV uptake

[40]/2016/Lisbon Portugal TC Hybrid Digital twin LV Increased penetration rates lead to hastened thermal
distribution ageing of transformers.
network (LV side)

[41]/2018/Bangkok, Thailand TC Hybrid Simulink model LV/MV High EV uptake has a detrimental effect on transformer
service life.
(Continues)
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
490
- NUTKANI ET AL.

T A B L E 1 (Continued)

Type of
Ref/Year/Location impact Data source Network/Model Voltage Comments/Key findings

[43]/2021/Golden, USA NV Hybrid LV feeder model LV Hosting capacity is significantly constrained at feeder
and nodes level, and varies across a distribution
HC
network is often by a single asset.
TC

[44]/2021/Delf, Netherland TC Real LV/MV distribution LV/MV EVs impact network is not detrimental and can be
grid further reduced with solar PV system
NV

[45]/2018/Berlin, Germany NV Synthetic Urban LV grid model LV Hosting capacity highly depends on charging behaviour
in urban settings
HC

[46]/2019/Baltimore, USA HC Synthetic IEEE 123 test feeder MV Proposed using voltage‐based approach to calculating
EV hosting capacity for distribution networks.

[47]/2021/Skellefteå, Sweden HC Synthetic Monte‐Carlo LV/MV Ambient temperature significantly impacts EV hosting
simulation, IEEE‐ capacity, due to seasonal variations in consumption
33 node and weather conditions on feeders' thermal limits.

[49]/2021/Seoul, Korea HC Synthetic Mathematical LV/MV Multidimensional approach for hosting capacity, by
considering several factors such as arrival time, state‐
of‐charge, location etc.

Abbreviations: HC, Hosting Capacity; LV, Low Voltage; MV, Medium Voltage; NL, Net Load; NV, Network Voltage; TC, Thermal Capacity.

F I G U R E 2 Exemplary load demand profile for a medium density urban network (#11) comprising 1264 households [17] without EVs and with EVs
charged using the charging profile from of EV trial [18].

reported scenario in refs. [32, 38]. These results are for the reported through several studies in refs. [21, 26, 36, 38, 40, 41,
unregulated “dumb” charging regimes of EVs, which is the 43, 44] where representative feeder models are used to study
most prevalent state at present. Since EV penetration alone, at EV load impact on the thermal aspects of distribution feeder
their 10% penetration, can derail network voltage by more than operation and how thermal capacity limitations relate to EV
10%, managing the impact of EVs on network voltage without hosting capacity. For instance, the work presented in ref. [38]
any additional mitigation measure is inevitable, particularly for study the impact of EVs load on LV distribution network
the LV network. The existing mitigation strategies and their thermal capacity where typical domestic load profiles were
effectiveness is further presented in Section 3. generated by the CREST tool. This study has concluded that
transformer thermal limits are breached at 30% EV penetra-
tion while feeder thermal limits are violated approximately at
3.3 | Thermal capacity 50% EV penetration. Research presented in ref. [26] adopt a
similar approach where impact of increased loading on
The existing distribution networks, including the distribution network assets and the impact of overload operation on their
transformer ratings, have been designed without anticipating life expectancy and degradation in the quality of service for the
the EV load demand; therefore, their thermal limits violate at a end user have been studied. The authors in refs. [40, 41] es-
certain EV penetration level. These findings have been timate that transformer life reduces by 30% when it is
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 491

TABLE 2 EVs impact on network load demand.

Ref, year Locality Approach Model/Analysis EV uptake (%) Load demand increase (%) Comment
[19], 2016 Inner City DþH Analytical/Statistical 30 6 Moderate increase

[20], 2020 Inner City S Simulation/Load flow 15 5

[21], 2017 Urban Egypt/BRTS‐B2 D Simulation/Load flow 100/100 86/100 Proportionate increase

[22], 2021 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 44 33

[23], 2019 Suburban‐IEEE B13 D Simulation/Load flow 50 47

[24], 2023 Urban S Simulation/Load flow 30 30

[6], 2022 Urban and rural D Simulation/Load flow 160 100

[25], 2023 Urban H Trial/Measurement 100 125

[26], 2019 Urban S Analytical/Probabilistic 40 82 Double/Triple increase

[27], 2016 Suburban BRTS‐B5 S Simulation/Load flow 100 350

[28], 2018 Urban S Analytical/Probabilistic 100 500

Note: Analysis Type: Analytical or Simulation. Analysis Method: Load flow Algorithm, Statistical Analysis, Probabilistic Analysis, Machine Leaning/Prediction Algorithm, Optimisation
Algorithm.
Abbreviations: D, Deterministic; H, Heuristic; S, Stochastic.

TABLE 3 EVs impact on distribution network voltage.

Ref/Year Locality Approach Model/Analysis EV uptake (%) Volt. Level Network voltage pu ∆V/EV (pu) Violation (IEC)
[21], 2017 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 30/100 MV 0.97/0.96 0.02 N/N

[22], 2021 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 44 MV 0.97 0.05 N

[27], 2016 Suburban S Simulation/Load flow 100 MV 0.93 0.04 Y

[33], 2020 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 20/80 MV 0.94/0.93 0.02 N/Y

[34], 2021 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 50/100 LV 0.9/0.88 0.04 Y

[23], 2019 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 50 LV 0.85 0.16 Y

[28], 2018 Urban S Analytical/Probabilistic 20/ LV 0.95/0.86 0.1–0.2 N/Y

[35], 2020 Suburban D Simulation/Load flow 23 LV 0.93 0.13 Y

[36], 2021 Rural S Simulation/Load flow 60 LV 0.90 0.16 N

[37], 2019 Suburban D Simulation/Load flow 20 LV 0.94 0.25 Y

[38], 2016 Suburban S Simulation/Load flow 20 LV 0.90 0.25 Y

[32], 2021 Urban S Simulation/Load flow 20/40 LV 0.96/0.9 0.3 N/Y

[39], 2021 Urban DþH Simulation/Load flow 50 LV 0.97 ‐ N

[24], 2023 Urban S Simulation/Load flow 20 LV 0.93 0.35 N

overloaded by up to 120% for a few hrs in a day, which could Therefore, it is important to assess the underpinning factors
occur at 20% EV penetration. Notably, most studies focus on constraining the hosting capacity to assist network planners
analysing the impact of EV penetration on distribution trans- and operators take appropriate actions. The research on EV
formers rather than feeders, which is the primary constraint for hosting capacity in networks and the constraining factor are
network hosting capacity. These results are summarised in summarised in Table 5.
Table 4 and discussed in the following section. The researchers in ref. [28] consider 20%–100% EV uptake
and 3.6 kW level 1 and 7.3‐kW level 2 chargers to assess the
hosting capacity of several residential distribution feeders. This
3.4 | Hosting capacity work concludes that the hosting capacity of the networks is
around 20% with level 1 chargers when there is no voltage
The network EV hosting capacity represents the level of EV violation at any node in the network. Similarly, the research in
load that can be allowed in the existing network without ref. [46] also assesses EV hosting capacity based on network
violating its thermal loading limits and operating voltage limits. voltage and consider level 1 chargers for home and level 2
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
492
- NUTKANI ET AL.

TABLE 4 EVs impact on distribution network assets thermal capacity.

Ref, year Locality Approach Model/Analysis EV uptake (%) Feeder overloaded Transformer overloaded
[21], 2017 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 30/100 ✗/✓ ✗✓

[26], 2019 Urban S Analytical/Probabilistic 40 ✗ ✓

[38], 2016 Suburban S Simulation/Load flow 40 ✗ ✓

[36], 2021 Rural S Simulation/Load flow 60 ✓ ✓

[40], 2016 Urban D‐H Analytical/Analytical 75 ✗ ✓

[41], 2018 Urban D Analytical/Analytical 100 ✗ ✓

[42], 2022 Urban D Analytical/Analytical 50 ✗ ✓

[25], 2023 Urban H Trial/Measurement 40 ✗ ✓

[43], 2021 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 50 ✓ N/A

[44], 2021 Suburban D Simulation/Load flow 80 ✗ ✗

Note: Model Type: Analytical or Simulation. Analysis Method: Load flow Algorithm, Statistical Analysis, Probabilistic Analysis, Machine Leaning/Prediction Algorithm, Optimisation
Algorithm.
Abbreviations: D, Deterministic; H, Heuristic; S, Stochastic.

TABLE 5 Distribution networks EVs hosting capacity and primary constraining factor.

Ref, year Locality Approach Model/Analysis EV hosting capacity (%) Constraint

[28], 2018 Urban S Analytical/Probabilistic 20 Undervoltage

[45], 2018 Suburban D Simulation/Load flow 50 Thermal (transformer)

[46], 2019 Urban S Simulation/Load flow 65 Undervoltage

[32], 2021 Suburban S Simulation/Load flow 60 Thermal (transformer)

[43], 2021 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 50 Thermal (feeder)

[47], 2021 Suburban D Simulation/Load flow >100 N/A

[48], 2021 Urban S Analytical/Probabilistic 60 Thermal (transformer)

[49], 2021 Uni Campus H‐S Analytical/Probabilistic 30 Undervoltage

[50], 2022 Urban D Simulation/Load flow 5/10 Thermal/Undervoltage

Rural 2/10 Thermal/Undervoltage

[6], 2022 Urban ‐NSWRural ‐NSW D Simulation/Load flow 80 Thermal

20/40 Thermal/Undervoltage

[25], 2023 Urban H Trial/Measurement 40 Thermal (transformer)

Note: Model Type: Analytical or Simulation. Analysis Method: Load flow Algorithm, Statistical Analysis, Probabilistic Analysis, Machine Leaning/Prediction Algorithm, Optimisation
Algorithm.
Abbreviations: D, Deterministic; H, Heuristic; S, Stochastic.

chargers for public charging stations. However, hosting ca- EV hosting capacity decreases by up to 30% during the winter
pacity is calculated based on the voltage constraint at each due to high heating load demand. Contrarily, the network EV
node, that is, by adding the allowable EVs at each node in hosting capacity in Asia decreases by up to 20% during the
IEEE 123 test bus system. In contrast, the research presented summer for the same reason [32]. The authors of ref. [43]
in ref. [45] shows that the charging behaviour and charger assessed EV hosting capacity of the overall network and its
compliance with the standard has a significant impact on nodes to pinpoint the congestion points in the network.
network supply power quality and its hosting capacity. Moreover, this study has determined that network hosting
The research presented in refs. [47, 48] analyse the impact capacity can be significantly high if level‐1 chargers which are
of seasonal temperature variations on distribution network slow chargers compared to level‐2 chargers, are used exclu-
hosting capacity in northern Europe while considering the sively. However, this capacity reduces if higher‐powered char-
underlying Heating Ventilation and Aircon (HVAC) re- gers are used instead. The authors in ref. [49] used a relatively
quirements and temperature impact on the EV battery state‐ detailed and different approach by implementing an algorithm
of‐charge (SOC). These studies have revealed that network with multiple inputs, such as the number of EVs, arrival time,
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 493

state‐of‐charge (SOC), battery capacity, and charger type/rate, on network dynamic hosting capacity [51] using real EV
to synthesise EVs charging profile for various nodes on the charging data that accurately captures user behaviour in various
distribution network. Based on this study, the network can host scenarios of offered benefits and tariffs, as discussed in sub-
over 30% EV penetration. sequent Section 5.
As reviewed in this section, various approaches, analysis
techniques and different approaches if data analysis have been
employed to assess the impact of EVs and hosting capacity of 4 | REVIEW OF EVS IMPACT
distribution networks. Among the three key approaches defined MITIGATION SOLUTIONS
earlier in this paper and compressively compared in Table 6,
deterministic and stochastic approaches are equally and widely Many strategies have been proposed to mitigate the impact of
used, while heuristic and hybrid approach are employed only in EVs on the network and consequently increase the hosting
a few studies. Despite its evident limitation, the deterministic capacity. These strategies can be broadly categorised into three
approach is widely utilised due to its ease of understanding, main groups: namely Controlled/Regulated Charging, Electric
implementation and interpretation. The results are accurate for Vehicles and Distributed Generation Management and
the considered system and operating conditions; however, they Network Management. The corresponding references for each
lack generalisability and wide applicability as uncertainties and category are summarised in Figure 3 and comprehensively
variabilities are not considered. In contrast, the stochastic compared in Table 7.
approach, although relatively challenging to implement and
interpret and requiring a large dataset, is the second most widely
adopted approach used in studies related to EV impact and 4.1 | Controlled/regulated charging
hosting capacity assessment. The popularity of this approach is
attributed to its benefits and wider applicability of its results for Solutions involving controlled or regulated charging effectively
a range of systems and operating scenarios. However, it is manage the impact of EVs with minimal capital investment.
noteworthy that the accuracy and applicability of results from These strategies can be further categorised into two groups –
these studies largely depends on the precision of the data used Legacy Charging and Smart Charging based on the following
to generate probabilistic datasets. Due to unavailability of large definitions:
scale EVs data, most studies utilising stochastic approach have Legacy Charging: Strategies that involve EV charging
resorted to either purely synthetic data or EVs trail data from a constrained or prioritised during specific times in a day, at their
limited number of EVs operating, mostly operating in a full rated power, are referred to as Legacy Charging. This may
controlled environment. This is one of the significant short- include operating the loads and charging of EV during defined
comings of existing research. For the same reasons, the hybrid off‐peak hours or following time‐of‐use tariffs without
approach has been seldom employed, presenting an opportu- considering any other factors.
nity to address in future research. Smart Charging: Strategies that involve EV charging
Moreover, the aforementioned studies have covered a wide scheduled considering either one or multiple factors, such as
range of EVs integration, operational scenarios, and network charging status, state‐of‐charge, the next journey, economics
types. However, there is a scope for evidence‐based research and underlying network demand to decide when to charge or

TABLE 6 Comparison of Key approaches used for EVs impact and hosting.

Approach Data type Pros/Cons Example studies

Deterministic Synthetic – � Simple and easy to understand, implement and interpret. [43, 45, 47, 50]
Fixed/ � Results are applicable to specific system and operating conditions, contingent on the accuracy
Scenarios of synthetic data.
� Uncertainties and variabilities are not considered; the solutions applicability may be limited
and suboptimal.

Stochastic Synthetic – Scenarios � Relatively difficult to understand, implement and interpret. [28, 32, 46, 48]
� Results cover a range of scenarios and are hence widely applicable, however, they depend on
the accuracy of synthetic data.
� Require more data and computational resources.

Heuristic/ Real – Fixed/ � Heuristic can be simple and easy to understand, implement and interpret while hybrid can be [25, 40, 49]
Hybrid Scenarios equally challenging.
� May considers the complexities and non‐linearities associated with user behaviour and the
distribution network.
� Results are relatively accurate.
� Uncertainties and variabilities are partly or fully considered; the solution applicability of a pure
heuristic approach may be limited to similar systems or operating scenarios, while hybrid
approach may have wider applicability.
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
494
- NUTKANI ET AL.

FIGURE 3 EVs impact mitigating solutions.

to adjust the charging rate are referred to as Smart Charging in impact on the network load effectively maintains voltage
this article. within network limits. An alternate study [19] also demon-
strates that network voltage could be maintained within
permissible limits with regulated charging at 100% EV
4.1.1 | Legacy charging penetration.
The authors of ref. [59] propose an aggregation approach
Numerous studies have evaluated the benefits of legacy where EV are charged according to a specific schedule, whilst
charging methodologies such as off‐peak, time‐of‐use (TOU) unscheduled charging is allowed at a cost penalty. Research in
and controlled loads, which are incredibly effective at sup- [60–62] proposed adaptive forecasting and scheduling which
pressing the EV impact. These solutions are likely to remain depends on variables such as network load, SOC, and next
prevalent due to their effectiveness and alignment with the journey, leading to a modest decrease in EV impact whilst
least‐cost approach preferred by the Distribution Network maintaining high levels of service for the end user. The study in
Service Providers (DNSPs). One study in particular [9] sug- ref. [63] is built on these previous studies by integrating fuzzy
gests that EV hosting capacity could be increased from 10% logic into the scheduling process to account for end‐users
with unregulated charging to 70% with time‐of‐use‐based preferences, resulting in a 40% reduction in peak loading and
charging strategies, as opposed to unregulated charging in the high user satisfaction.
same network. Another approach in ref. [52] demonstrated that Compared with smart scheduled (time‐based) charging,
off‐peak EVs charging can reduce the load difference between dynamic smart‐charging reacts instantaneously to network
peak and off‐peak hours, allowing power plants to effectively conditions and varies charging rates as deemed necessary
utilise their respective generation capacities. The authors in ref. while maintaining a high level of availability. Authors in ref.
[53] implemented a price‐based control structure leading to [56] presented a priority‐based charging protocol with
more than 20% reduction in peak demand and significant charging stations operating under a distributed control
savings for the end‐user. A study in ref. [54] proposed an structure to manage EV overall load. The EVs are placed in
evolution of a dedicated controlled load type approach for the a queue according to the demand and/or network voltage
EV charger and other non‐critical loads, which can be either cross specified thresholds, resulting in an 80% reduction in
controlled by the DNSP or connected to a dedicated circuit, peak charging demand. Authors in ref. [57] also propose
allowing for peak loads to be managed whilst also providing distributed control to manage network loading at the trans-
economic incentives. former level. The EV chargers decrease or increase their load
The studies based on legacy approaches represent a large based on transformer‐predetermined thresholds, resulting in
part of the current research due to their effectiveness and their a significant reduction in hotspot temperatures and an in-
ability to make use of existing demand management infra- crease in the service life of the transformers. In contrast, the
structure allowing for considerable cost savings to occur. authors of ref. [58] propose a fully decentralised control
strategy by applying fuzzy logic to voltage and SOC to
determine the charging current that minimises impact and
4.1.2 | Smart charging maintains usability, resulting in a slight reduction in voltage
impact.
Compared to the legacy charging approaches, smart EVs Table 8 summarises and compares various controlled
scheduling or charging is relatively more effective [10] and may charging strategies which are found to be reasonably effective
consider multiple factors such as charging status, SOC, next in reducing the load demand by up to 20%–50% without
journey, and underlying network demand to decide when to network infrastructural orchestration/reinforcement. These
charge or to adjust the charging rate. A study in ref. [55] finding provide clear directive for policy reforms to introduce
proposes a voltage‐based approach where the charging time- incentivised charging [73]. In addition, as discussed in the next
slot is booked, and queues are adjusted according to the section, other strategies are needed to mitigate the EVs impact
network voltage. This methodology, whilst having a modest further
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 495

TABLE 7 Consolidated summary of literature analysing EVs impact mitigating solutions.

Network
Impact Ref. Type of solution Data source Model Comments/Key findings
Controlled charging NL [52]/2009/ Load shift Hybrid Mathematical The use of off‐peak charging allows for
Munich, Time of use EV uptake rates of more than 33% to
Germany occur without any augmentation of
energy infrastructure.
NL [53]/2018/ Compensators Real IEEE‐33 Tariff‐based time of use control provides
Montreal, Scheduled for a significant reduction in network
NV
Canada Time of use impact whilst providing an economic
incentive to user
NL [54]/2019/Vellore, Load shift Hybrid LV grid Load shifting is an effective legacy
India Controlled demand management tool that can
charging significantly reduce the increase in
peak demand due to EV uptake.
NL [55]/2015/Hong Load shift Hybrid IEEE‐33 Scheduled controlled charging strategies
Kong, China Time of use can effectively maintain voltage
NV
Controlled within permissible limits under
Scheduled increased EV uptake rates.
NL [56]/2012/ Scheduled, TOU Hybrid LV grid Distributed controlled charging can
Karlsruhe, Controlled result in more than 80% decrease in
NV
Germany peak charging demand.
NL [57]/2016/ Controlled Synthetic Mathematical Distributed control can significantly
Guyancourt, charging reduce the impact on transformer
France Scheduling lifetimes caused by higher EV uptake.
NL [58]/2017/ Controlled Synthetic LV grid Voltage‐based decentralised control
Kaohsiung, significantly reduces the impact on
HC
Taiwan network voltage.
NL [59]/2018/Jaipur, Controlled Synthetic LV grid Collaborative scheduling schemes not
India charging only provide a significant reduction
Scheduling in EV impact but provide economic
befits to retailers and end users.
NL [60]/2019/Jaipur, Controlled Hybrid Mathematical Smart scheduling combined with V2G
India Scheduled technology can provide a small but
Forecasting significant reduction in peak network
demand whilst maintaining the
quantity of service (QoS) expected by
the end users.
NL [61]/2021/ Controlled load Hybrid IEEE‐33 Flexible scheduling can significantly
Knoxville, Load shift reduce network impact under peak
NV
USA Scheduled loading, by providing economic
incentives to aggregators and
consumers to shift non‐time critical
loads.
NL [62]/2014/ Load shift Synthetic IEEE‐34 Smart scheduling can effectively optimise
Chicago, USA Time of use EV charging timeslots, leading to the
NV
mitigation of network impact,
resulting in increase in EV hosting
capacity.
NL [63]/2020/College Distributed Synthetic Mathematical End‐user comfort‐based controlled
station, USA generation charging allows for a significant
TC
Controlled reduction in transformer service life
degradation whilst maintaining high
levels of service for the end user.
(Continues)
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
496
- NUTKANI ET AL.

T A B L E 7 (Continued)

Network
Impact Ref. Type of solution Data source Model Comments/Key findings

Distributed NL [64]/2016/ Distributed Hybrid MATLAB Smart charge/discharging optimisation

Generations/ Birmingham, generation techniques can effectively reduce
EVs United Controlled network impact by absorbing excess
management Kingdom power in the off‐peak whilst
providing additional localised
generation in times of high demand.
NL [65]/2018/Jaipur, Distributed Synthetic Mathematical PV‐based smart scheduled charging is
India generation particularly effective in workplace
NV
Scheduling environments taking advantage of
peak PV generation and intelligent
scheduling based on underlying
demand.
NL [66]/2021/Sydney, Distributed Hybrid Monte‐Carlo Combination of smart scheduling and
Australia generation real‐time coordinated control in
Controlled microgrids can effectively reduce
Scheduled network impact by effectively
implementing EV's as virtual
batteries that work in coordination
with intermittent generations such as
solar PV.
NL [11]/2013/ Load shift Hybrid Mathematical Surplus renewable generation‐based EV
Glasgow, Distributed charging can effectively reduce EV
Scotland generation impact whilst providing additional
benefits such as acting as a load sink
to absorb excess generation.
NL [67]/2019/ Distributed Hybrid LV grid The use of energy storage systems at EV
Bangkok, generation charging systems can significantly
Thailand reduce peak demand by shifting the
load from the perspective of the
network.
HC [68]/2021/Sao Distributed Hybrid IEEE‐33 Both EV taking advantage of V2G
Paulo, Brazil generation technology and distributed
Controlled generation sources are coordinated in
concert with one another allowing
for an increase in hosting capacity
not just for EV's but DG as well.
HC [69]/2021/ Local storage Hybrid MATLAB The use of localised combined Heat and
Coventry, Distributed power (CHP) generation in industrial
TC
United generation plants allows workers access to high
Kingdom levels of EV charging capacity with
minimal to no impact on the outside
distribution network.
Network/ HC [70]/2020/ Network Hybrid IEEE‐33 Hosting capacity of the network can be
Assorted Reno, USA optimisation increased significantly by
reconfiguring the distribution
network using sectionalisation and
tie‐switches.
NL [71]/2020/ Battery Swap Hybrid Mathematical The battery swapping approach can
Rajkot, India effectively manage networks peaks
HC
demand caused by the charging
stations, whilst enabling rapid
refuelling. However, it requires large
infrastructure and standardisation of
batteries
HC [48]/2021/ Dynamic Trans/ Hybrid Mathematical The use of dynamic substation ratings
Skelleftea, line rating concerning the ambient temperature
TC
Sweden can lead to significant increases in a
feeder's hosting capacity.

Abbreviations: HC, Hosting Capacity; NL, Net Load; NV, Network Voltage; TC, Thermal Capacity.
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 497

TABLE 8 Level of load reduction with EVs controlled/regulated charging solution.

Ref, year Locality Approach Model/Analysis Mitigation control strategy Load reductiona
[9], 2020 Urban S Analytical/Probabilistic TOU High

[52], 2009 Urban D Analytical/Analytical Off‐peak Low

[56], 2012 Urban, rural D Simulation/Load flow Distributed Control High

[55], 2014 Urban D Simulation/Load flow Smart scheduling Low

[57], 2016 Typical LV network D Analytical/Optimisation Distributed Control Medium

[58], 2017 Urban D‐H Analytical/Dispatch strategy Distributed Control Low

[53], 2018 Urban D Simulation/Load flow Tariff based Medium

[59], 2018 Urban D Analytical/Optimisation Scheduling/Aggregation Low

[60], 2019 Urban D Analytical/Prediction Smart scheduling Low

[54], 2019 Urban D Analytical/DSM algorithm Controlled load Low

[61], 2021 Urban D Analytical/Optimisation Smart scheduling Low

[62], 2014 Urban D Analytical/Optimisation Smart scheduling Medium

[63], 2020 Urban D‐S Analytical/Optimisation Smart scheduling Medium

[72],2023 Urban D‐H Analytical/Optimisation Smart scheduling High

[25], 2023 Urban H Trial/Measurement Smart scheduling High

Note: Model Type: Analytical or Simulation. Analysis Method: Load flow Algorithm, Statistical Analysis, Probabilistic Analysis, Machine Leaning/Prediction Algorithm, Optimisation
Algorithm.
Abbreviations: D, Deterministic, H, Heuristic; S, Stochastic.
a
Low = 0–20%, Medium = 20–50%, High = >50%.

4.2 | Active management of EVs and when demand is high. Table 9 summarises these different
Distributed Generation strategies involving DGs and V2G operation, demonstrating
their effectiveness in reducing the impact of EVs and the need
The controlled or regulated EV charging methodologies can for more research on the economics of these options.
help manage EV impact up to a certain level, however, may not
be adequate at high penetration levels. Another key approach is
to actively manage both EV charging and local Distributed 4.3 | Network management
Generation including their operating modes. The authors of
ref. [11] propose vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) operation to soak up A few studies have reported EV impact mitigating solutions
surplus renewable power or reduce EVs charging load to involving network asset or configuration management. For
manage peak demand during the evening by up to 90%. instance, the “dynamic transformer” approach in ref. [48] en-
Similarly, the authors of ref. [68] propose V2G operation with ables higher EV penetration by dynamically adjusting the dis-
renewable DGs where the EVs act as a “prosumer”—to act as tribution substation ratings based on prevailing atmospheric
a load or a generation source, resulting in significantly conditions. This approach has considerable merit, although its
enhanced network hosting capacity for both EVs and DGs. An applicability in other climatic conditions require further study.
alternate approach proposes using storage systems to effec- A solution proposed in ref. [70] involve network reconfigura-
tively perform a virtual load shift [54]. The storage system is tion, where the rearrangement of network tie points and
charged from the grid during low demand and discharged to switches dependent on the position of EV charging stations,
allow uninterrupted EVs charging, leading to a significant thereby minimising the impact of EVs on the distribution
reduction in peak demand [67] and are also referred to as network. Whilst theoretically sound approach to manage the
storage‐integrated EV chargers. The research presented in ref. impact of EVs and DGs on distribution network, practical
[69] propose utilising Combined Heat and Power (CHP) based realisation of this solution could be challenging and require
generator for demand management and charging EVs in the further study.
car park of an industrial site. The EV charging demand is Among various other commonly proposed strategies, bat-
locally managed, effectively eliminating the impact on the tery swapping is a popular choice endorsed by several re-
distribution network. Several other studies [64–66] propose searchers [71]. While offering time efficiency and effective
different EV charging and discharging strategies to exploit the networks demand management, this method demand large
full potential of solar PV DGs by charging EVs from surplus infrastructure and necessitates the standardisation of battery
generation during the day and generating power from EVs types and sizes. Another viable practical approach involves
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
498
- NUTKANI ET AL.

TABLE 9 Level of load reduction with active management of EVs and distributed generation.

Ref, year Locality Approach Model/Analysis Mitigation method Type Load reduction
[11], 2013 Theoretical D Analytical/Analytical Load shift V2G High

[67], 2019 Urban D Analytical/Analytical Load shift Energy storage High

[68], 2021 Theoretical D Analytical/Optimisation Load shift V2G Medium

[69], 2021 Industrial D Simulation/Load flow Load shift CHP High

[64], 2016 Theoretical D Analytical/Optimisation Smart scheduling V2G Medium

[65], 2018 Theoretical D Analytical/Optimisation Smart scheduling PV Medium

[66], 2021 Theoretical D Analytical/Optimisation Smart scheduling PV Medium

Note: Model Type: Analytical or Simulation. Analysis Method: Load flow Algorithm, Statistical Analysis, Probabilistic Analysis, Machine Leaning/Prediction Algorithm, Optimisation
Algorithm.
Abbreviations: D, Deterministic; H, Heuristic; S, Stochastic.

renewable powered EV charging stations [74] and strategically the lake of EVs charging data required for model devel-
optimised placement of charging stations in the network [75]. opment and validation.
Despite the considerable attention given to charging infra- The Need for Generalisation and Detailed Impact
structure and its optimal placement in the distribution network Analysis: The level of stress on the network assets and
by many researchers, there remains a notable gap – most violation of network voltage limits due to EV charging load are
studies analysing the impact of EVs on distribution network often obtained using deterministic or stochastic approach us-
overlook the load demand of such commercial charging sta- ing synthetic data and results are given in absolute values in
tions and as well as heavy vehicles and trucks. many studies. Moreover, in most studies the network hosting
Various approaches and model types are employed for the capacity is defined based on a single or a few occurrences of
assessment of EV impact mitigating solutions, similar to EV thermal or voltage violations in the network at certain EV
impact analysis studies. As summarised in Tables 8 and 9, most penetration. This approach may provide incomplete or
studies utilised a deterministic approach using analytical misleading information. Consequently, along with the consid-
models and optimisation algorithms. This is indeed a rational eration of different network designs and operating states in
approach as it is focused, accurate and helpful in understanding each study, hosting capacity results vary widely. While existing
the relative effectiveness of different strategies used for impact work highlights the key constraints and bottlenecks in the
mitigation. However, it is noteworthy that the objective of network and EVs hosting capacity, there is ample room to
most studies' is narrowed—such as reducing the load or peak further quantify this impact in detail and generalise the
load and or managing the voltage. This highlights the need to findings.
investigate multi‐objective solutions and reassess their impact The Need to Establish Clear Rules and Regulations
on different aspects of the network, including the financial and for Network Operators and Studies Based on Real EV
regulatory impact of the solutions. Charging Data: Research on the impact of EVs on the dis-
tribution network and mitigating solutions has been focused on
various forms of controlled charging strategies and active
5 | SUMMARY AND management of EVs and DGs, including storage systems.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE Majority of research investigates the deployment of time‐based
RESEARCH or scheduled charging strategies or smart strategies where
charging time and/or rate depend on multiple factors such as
5.1 | Summary and identified shortcomings network conditions and load demand. Another proposed set of
strategies involves active management of EVs and DGs and,
Practical Aspects and Consumer Behaviour Modelling: such as V2G operation, to enable higher EV uptake rates.
Most research on the impact of EVs on the distribution There is a scope to develop multidimensional and conclusive
network has been focused on forecasting the additional load solutions to solve network hosting capacity issues and to help
demand of EVs, assessing its impact on thermal capacity, network operators and regulators to define the rules/regula-
operating voltage and stability. These studies cover a wide tions. Also, there is need to understand the financial implica-
range of network topologies and their design and operating tion and associated regulatory hurdles in practical
scenarios. However, the EV demand profiles in most of implementation of different solutions. Moreover, the viability
these studies are obtained from small scare trials or fore- of these solutions in practice depends on consumer EV usage
casted, thereby lake practicality and consideration of con- and charging behaviour. Therefore, large scale and more
sumer behaviour. The development of deterministic and conclusive studies based on real‐EV charging data, including all
probabilistic EV load models is mainly constrained due to types of fleets are needed.
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 499

Hybrid Approach and Multi‐objective Solutions: Most and operating scenarios of EVs impact the dynamic rating/
studies have primarily employed either a deterministic or sto- capacity of networks and vice versa.
chastic approach using real, synthetic or hybrid data and Techno‐economic Analysis of Solutions: While the
focusing on a specific aspect, such as thermal loading or effectiveness of regulated/controlled charging has been widely
voltage stability issue due to EVs or investigating specific so- demonstrated, there is a lack of comprehensive research on the
lutions to mitigate the impact of EVs charging load. A more financial and regulatory implication of regulated/controlled
holistic and hybrid approach, which could provide more robust charging for different stakeholders including EV or charging
results that are applicable to different context, has been seldom station owners, the network operators and the market. Future
used, mainly due to limited scope of each research article, the studies should conduct techno‐economic analysis of different
complexities involved and the lake of large scale EVs data. solutions and their practical implications such as regulatory
Therefore, there is a need for more holistic and hybrid ap- issues.
proaches to be employed in future studies. A hybrid approach Role of Distribution Generation and Storage: Distrib-
can also offer more flexibility and adaptability to different uted generation and storage are the best options after regu-
scenarios and contexts, helping to find the optimal trade‐offs lated/controlled EV charging to manage EV charging and its
and solutions. Moreover, the impact of different solutions on impact, as widely demonstrated through various studies.
different aspects of the network has not been the primary Further research is needed to determine the penetration level
focus and thus needs to be addressed. of DGs and electrical storage systems and their operating
regime to manage the specific demand of EV charging. In
addition, economic consequences of additional DGs (such as
5.2 | Recommendations for future research solar PV) and storage systems required to manage EV demand
needs to be thoroughly studied.
Based on these shortcomings identified above, a few recom- Holistic and Hybrid Approach: Since impact of EVs and
mendations for future research are provided: hosting capacity of distribution networks depends on many
Realistic EV Load Model and Profiles: With increasing factors, such as load demand, the charging behaviour, the
availability of consumers EV usage and charging behaviour network design and constraints. Many of these factors are
data, the future studies should develop realistic EV load uncertain and variable, and they may affect different objectives
models and usage profiles. These models should account for for developing solutions, such as the network performance and
energy demand, drive patterns, and consumer behaviour to economic of EV mitigating solutions. A more holistic and
different incentives provided by the retailer. Therefore, it is hybrid approach, combining two or more approaches, may
crucial to use the deterministic and probabilistic EV and load capture the complexity and diversity of the problem effectively,
models and profiles developed based on actual EV fleets mix and generate more viable solutions. Moreover, as highlighted
or charger types and usage. Particularly, commercial charging earlier, robust and generic results can be obtained by incor-
stations and commercial electrical vehicles, including heavy porating multiple objective criteria in developing solutions. In
vehicles are expected to have a significant impact on the dis- addition, the impact of different mitigating solutions needs to
tribution networks which has not mostly ignored in existing be assessed in detail on various aspects of network design and
studies and hence need to be thoroughly considered. operation which is currently has not been widely studied.
Detailed Impact Quantification: Current metrics used
for network impact and hosting capacity assessment often
follow the conventional worst‐case which is a classical 6 | CONCLUSION
approach used for electrical system design. This approach can
be misleading as bottleneck in one segment should not be used This paper has presented a comprehensive review of research
as a criterion to define the whole network hosting capacity. on the impact of EV charging on the distribution network and
Future studies should adopt detailed quantification approach, the corresponding solutions/mitigation strategies. The litera-
providing insights into the impact at the asset level, such as ture review shows that EV charging will have a significant
individual feeders or transformers. This may include probabi- impact on the network thermal capacity and operating voltage,
listic and statistical metrics like percentage of overloading or which must be managed. While controlled or regulated
voltage violation, frequency of occurrence, and the durations. charging of EV proved to be an effective solution, this solution
Such detailed quantification of impact is essential to better alone may not be enough. Another effective strategy, requiring
understand the state and the real hosting capacity of the no infrastructure overhaul, involves active control of DGs and
network and to find the optimal solution. storage systems including EVs themselves, to completely
Dynamic Hosting Capacity Assessment: In addition to overcome their impact on the network. Despite considerable
the need for accurate and detailed assessment, the hosting advancement in this field, the research points towards the
capacity [51] of networks depends on the penetration level and imperative need for further investigation. To encapsulate,
operating states of DGs, storage system, EVs and the network,
including their operating modes. Therefore, assessing the dy- � Researchers are urged to delve deeper into the intricate
namic hosting capacity of the network is essential. More dynamic between EVs and distribution networks, consid-
analysis is required to understand how different penetration ering their diverse operating scenarios, real‐world data,
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
500
- NUTKANI ET AL.

advanced and detailed impact quantification methodologies, CIRED Porto Workshop 2022: E‐Mobility and Power Distribution
and dynamic capacities of the networks. The research Systems, Hybrid Conference, pp. 681–685 (2022)
emphasis the need for a holistic and hybrid approach, 7. Kim, T.‐H., Kim, D., Moon, S.‐I.: Evaluation of electric vehicles hosting
capacity based on interval undervoltage probability in a distribution
combining deterministic, stochastic and heuristic methods, network. IEEE Access 9, 140147–140155 (2021). https://doi.org/10.
to generate robust and generalisable results along with 1109/access.2021.3116465
optimal solutions based on multi‐objective criteria for EVs 8. Hou, Y., et al.: EV hosting capacity and voltage unbalance: an Australian
impact mitigation. case study. In: 2023 IEEE PES Grid Edge Technologies Conference &
� For utilities and policymakers, the research provides a clear Exposition (Grid Edge), pp. 1–5 (2023)
9. Mengyu Li, M.L., Lenzen, M.: How many electric vehicles can the cur-
directive to formulate policies that actively manage networks rent Australian electricity grid support? Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.
and incentivise controlled charging practices for optimal 117, 105586 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2019.105586
network performance. However, successful implementation 10. Deb, S., Pihlatie, M., Al‐Saadi, M.: Smart charging: a comprehensive
may hinge on coordinated and collaborative efforts in review. IEEE Access 10, 134690–134703 (2022). https://doi.org/10.
1109/access.2022.3227630
research to develop feasible and effective implementation
11. Huang, D.S., Infield, A., Cruden, D.: Plug‐in electric vehicles as demand
plan. response to absorb local wind generation in power distribution network.
In: 2013 World Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition, pp. 1–5.
AUT HO R C ON T R I BU T I O NS Barcelona, Spain (2013)
Inam Nukani: Conceptualization; Formal analysis; Method- 12. Garwa, N., Niazi, K.R.: Impact of EV on Integration with Grid System –
ology; Software; Supervision; Writing – original draft; Writing – A Review, pp. 1–6. 8th International Conference on Power Systems
(ICPS), Jaipur, India (2019)
review & editing. Hamish Toole: Conceptualization; Formal 13. Song, B., Madawala, U., Baguley, C.: A review of grid impacts, demand
analysis; Writing – original draft. Nuwantha Fernando: side issues and planning related to electric vehicle charging. In: 2021
Formal analysis; Supervision; Validation; Writing – review & IEEE Southern Power Electronics Conference (SPEC), Kigali, Rwanda,
editing. Loh Poh Chiang Andrew: Formal analysis; Supervi- pp. 1–6 (2021)
14. Rahman, S., et al.: Comprehensive review & impact analysis of integrating
sion; Validation; Writing – review & editing.
projected electric vehicle charging load to the existing low voltage dis-
tribution system. In: Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol.
ACK NO W LE DG E ME NT 153 (2022)
Open access publishing facilitated by RMIT University, as part 15. Rahman, S., Khan, I.A., Amini, M.H.: A review on impact analysis of
of the Wiley ‐ RMIT University agreement via the Council of electric vehicle charging on power distribution systems. In: 2020 2nd
Australian University Librarians. International Conference on Smart Power & Internet Energy Systems
(SPIES), pp. 420–425 (2020)
16. Avila‐Rojas, A.E., Jesus, D.O., Alvarez, P.M.M.: Distribution network
CON FL ICT O F I NT E R E ST STA T EM E NT electric vehicle hosting capacity enhancement using an optimal power
We certify that we have no conflict of interest – financial in- flow formulation. Electr. Eng. 104(3), 1337–1348 (2022). https://doi.
terest or personal relationship, associated with this paper. org/10.1007/s00202‐021‐01374‐7
17. Adam, B., et al. (2015): Representative Australian Electricity Feeders with
Load and Solar Generation Profiles, CSIRO Data Collection, accessed:
DATA AVA IL A BI LI TY S TA T EM E NT 18.12.2023
Data available on request from the authors. 18. UK Power Network. (2021). Low carbon London electric Vehicle Load
Profiles (Online), https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/low‐carbon‐
O RC ID london‐electric‐vehicle‐load‐profiles, accessed: 18.12.2023
Inam Nutkani https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5827-6649 19. Jiang, H.: Analysis of electric vehicle charging impact on the electric
power grid: based on smart grid regional demonstration project — Los
Angeles. In: 2016 IEEE PES Transmission & Distribution Conference
R EF E REN CE S and Exposition‐Latin America (PES T&D‐LA), pp. 1–5. Morelia, Mexico
1. International Energy Agency: Tracking Transport 2020. IEA Reports (2016)
(2022). https://www.iea.org/reports/transport. Accessed 20 02 2023 20. Feng, K., et al.: The impact of plug‐in electric vehicles on distribution
2. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Develo- network. In: 2020 IEEE International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2),
ment, Commonwealth of Australia: Electric Vehicle Uptake: Modelling a pp. 1–7. Piscataway, NJ, USA (2020)
Global Phenomenon (2019). https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/ 21. Abul'Wafa, A.R., El'Garably, A., Mohamed, W.A.F.: Impacts of uncoor-
2019/bitre‐report‐151/. Accessed 20 02 2023 dinated and coordinated integration of electric vehicles on distribution
3. Engel, H., et al.: The Potential Impact of Electric Vehicles on Global systems performance. In: 2017 Nineteenth International Middle East
Energy Systems. McKinsey & Company (2021). https://www.mckinsey. Power Systems Conference (MEPCON), pp. 337–364. Cairo (2017)
com/industries/automotive‐and‐assembly/our‐insights/the‐potential‐ 22. Hashim, M.S., et al.: Assessment of technical impacts of EV charging to
impact‐of‐electric‐vehicles‐on‐global‐energy‐systems/. Accessed 20 02 Malaysian distribution grid. In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on
2023 Automatic Control & Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS), pp. 337–364. Shah
4. International Energy Agency: Global EV Outlook 2021: Accelerating Alam, Malaysia (2021)
Ambitions Despite the Pandemic. IEA Reports (2021). https://www.iea. 23. Jain, A., Jariwala, H.R., Mhaskar, U.: Impact on the transmission and
org/reports/global‐ev‐outlook‐2021/. Accessed 20 02 2023 distribution grid by the deployment of electric vehicles charging. In: 2019
5. Mai, T., et al.: Electrification Futures Study: Scenarios of Electric International Conference on Computing, Power and Communication
Technology Adoption. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden Technologies (GUCON), pp. 250–256 (2019)
(2018) 24. Abid, M.S., et al.: Mitigating the effect of electric vehicle integration in
6. Nacmanson, W.J., Zhu, J., Ochoa, L.F.: Assessing the unmanaged EV distribution grid using slime mould algorithm. Alex. Eng. J. 64, 785–800
hosting capacity of Australian rural and urban distribution networks. In: (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2022.09.022
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NUTKANI ET AL.
- 501

25. Quiros‐Tortos, J., Ochoa, L., Butler, T.: How electric vehicles and the 45. Draz, M., Voß, D.F.M., Albayrak, S.: The impact of electric vehicles on
grid work together: lessons learned from one of the largest electric low voltage grids: a case study of Berlin. In: 2018 Power Systems
vehicle trials in the world. IEEE Power Energy Mag. 21(2), 64–76 (2023). Computation Conference (PSCC), pp. 1–7. Dublin (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1109/mpe.2018.2863060 46. Kamruzzaman, M., Bhusal, N., Benidris, M.: Determining maximum
26. Silva, G.M., et al.: Recharging electric vehicles: impact on the load curve hosting capacity of electric distribution systems to electric vehicles. In:
of a low‐voltage distribution network. In: 2019 IEEE PES Innovative 2019 IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, pp. 1–7.
Smart Grid Technologies Conference ‐ Latin America (ISGT Latin Baltimore (2019)
America), pp. 1–6. Gramado, Brazil (2019) 47. Letha, S.S., Bollen, M.: Estimation of electric vehicle hosting capacity of a
27. Shrestha, S., ansen, T.M.: Distribution feeder impacts of electric vehicles distribution network including ambient temperature. In: CIRED 2021 ‐
charging in an integrated traffic and power network. In: 2016 North the 26th International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distri-
American Power Symposium (NAPS), pp. 1–6. Denver (2016) bution, Online Conference, pp. 2350–2355 (2021)
28. Cundeva, S., Mateska, A.K., Bollen, M.H.J.: Hosting capacity of LV 48. Hajeforosh, S.F., Bollen, M.H.J.: Increasing the grid capacity for electric
residential grid for uncoordinated ev charging. In: 2018 18th Interna- vehicle charging using dynamic rating. In: CIRED 2021 ‐ the 26th In-
tional Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP), pp. ternational Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution, Vir-
1–5. Ljubljana (2018) tual Conference, pp. 1777–1781 (2021)
29. Velocity Energy: Velocity Energy (Online) (2016). http://www. 49. Kim, T.H., Kim, D., Moon, S.I.: Evaluation of electric vehicles hosting
velocityenergy.com.au/peak‐demand‐management. Accessed 20 02 capacity based on interval undervoltage probability in a distribution
2023 network. IEEE Access 9, 140147–140155 (2021). https://doi.org/10.
30. Collins, M.E., et al.: Understanding the Network Impact of EV Growth: 1109/access.2021.3116465
Long‐Term Planning Approaches Developed in the Charge Project, pp. 50. Nutkani, I.U., Lee, J.C.: Evaluation of electric vehicles (evs) impact on
147–150. CIRED 2020 Berlin Workshop, Berlin (2020) electric grid. In: International Power Electronic Confrence (IPEC), pp.
31. IEC standard voltages: International Standard IEC Standard IEC 239–246. Himeji, Japan (2022)
(2003).60038 51. Dippenaar, J., Bekker, B.: Towards locally appropriate electric vehicle
32. Abid, M.S., et al.: Impact assessment of charging of electric vehicle. In: hosting capacity regulations. In: CIRED Porto Workshop 2022: E‐
2021 56th International Universities Power Engineering Conference Mobility and Power Distribution Systems, Hybrid Conference, pp.
(UPEC), pp. 1–6. Middlesbrough, United Kingdom (2021) 611–615. Porto, Portugal (2022)
33. Antoun, J., et al.: Impact analysis of level 2 EV chargers on residential 52. Roth, H., Kuhn, P., Gohla‐Neudecker, B.: Sustainable mobility ‐ cost‐
power distribution grids. In: 2020 IEEE 14th International Conference effective and zero emission integration of Germany's EV fleet. In:
on Compatibility, Power Electronics and Power Engineering (CPE‐ 2009 International Conference on Clean Electrical Power, pp. 207–211.
POWERENG), pp. 523–529. (2020) Capri, Italy (2009)
34. Prakash, P., et al.: Impact of electric vehicles in three‐phase distribution 53. Dang, Q.: Electric vehicle (EV) charging management and relieve im-
grids. In: CIRED 2021 ‐ the 26th International Conference and Exhi- pacts in grids. In: 2018 9th IEEE International Symposium on Power
bition on Electricity Distribution, pp. 2084–2088. Virtual (2021) Electronics for Distributed Generation Systems (PEDG), pp. 1–5.
35. Helm, S., et al.: Impact of unbalanced electric vehicle charging on low Charlotte (2018)
voltage grid. In: 2020 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies 54. Badugu, J., Obulesu, Y.P., Babu, C.S.: Development of demand side
Europe (ISGT‐Europe), pp. 665–669. Virtual (2020) management strategy for smart residential distribution system embedded
36. Venegas, F.G., et al.: Impact of distributed energy resources and electric with EV Load. In: TENCON 2019 ‐ 2019 IEEE Region 10 Conference,
vehicle smart charging on low voltage grid stability. In: CIRED 2021 ‐ pp. 1655–1660. Kochi, India (2019)
the 26th International Conference and Exhibition, pp. 1905–1909. Vir- 55. Mao, T., et al.: A new schedule‐controlled strategy for charging large
tual (2021) number of EVs with load shifting and voltage regulation. In: 2015 IEEE
37. Hasan, K.N., et al.: Measurement‐based electric vehicle load profile PES Asia‐Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC),
and its impact on power system operation. In: 2019 9th International pp. 1–5. Brisbane (2014)
Conference on Power and Energy Systems (ICPES), pp. 1–6. Perth 56. Reiner, U., Elsinger, C., Leibfried, T.: Distributed self organising Electric
(2019) Vehicle charge controller system: peak power demand and grid load
38. Quirós‐Tortós, J., et al.: Control of EV charging points for thermal and reduction with adaptive EV charging stations. In: 2012 IEEE Interna-
voltage management of LV networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(4), tional Electric Vehicle Conference, pp. 1–6. Greenville (2012)
3028–3039 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/tpwrs.2015.2468062 57. Beaude, O., et al.: Reducing the impact of EV charging operations on the
39. Yusuf, J., Hasan, A.S.M.J., Ula, S.: Impacts analysis of electric vehicles distribution network. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 7(6), 2666–2679 (2016).
integration to the residential distribution grid. In: 2021 IEEE Kansas https://doi.org/10.1109/tsg.2015.2489564
Power and Energy Conference (KPEC), pp. 1–6. Kansa USA (2021) 58. Teng, J., Liao, S., Wen, C.: Design of a fully decentralized controlled
40. Godina, R., et al.: Weekend charging impact of EVs on a residential electric vehicle charger for nitigating charging impact on power grids.
distribution transformer in a Portuguese Island. In: 2016 51st Interna- IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 53(2), 1497–1505. https://doi.org/10.1109/tia.
tional Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), pp. 1–6. 2016.2622221 (2017)
Coimbra, Portugal (2016) 59. Gupta, V., et al.: EV benefit evaluation in a collaborative scheduling
41. Utakrue, M., Hongesombut, K.: Impact analysis of electric vehicle quick environment with penalties for unscheduled EVs. In: 2018 8th IEEE
charging to power transformer life time in distribution system. In: 2018 India International Conference on Power Electronics (IICPE), pp. 1–6.
IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo, Asia‐Pacific, Jaipur, India (2018)
pp. 1–5. Bangkok, Thailand (2018) 60. Gautam, A., Verma, A.K., Srivastava, A.M.: A novel algorithm for
42. Jain, A., Karimi‐Ghartemani, M.: Mitigating adverse impacts of increased scheduling of electric vehicle using adaptive load forecasting with
electric vehicle charging on distribution transformers. Energies 15(23), vehicle‐to‐grid integration. In: 8th International Conference on Power
9023 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/en15239023 Systems (ICPS), pp. 1–6. Jaipur, India (2019)
43. Paudyal, P., et al.: EV hosting capacity analysis on distribution grids. In: 61. Wang, X., et al.: Tri‐level scheduling model considering residential de-
2021 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM), pp. mand flexibility of aggregated hvacs and EVs under distribution LMP.
1–5. Washington (2021) IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 12(5), 3990–4002 (2021). https://doi.org/10.
44. Wagh, S., et al.: Aggregated impact of EV charger type and EV pene- 1109/tsg.2021.3075386
tration level in improving PV integration in distribution grids. In: 2021 62. Hua, L., Wang, J., Zhou, C.: Adaptive electric vehicle charging coordi-
IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference & Expo (ITEC), pp. nation on distribution network. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 5(6), 2666–2675
595–600. Chicago (2021) (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/tsg.2014.2336623
 25152947, 2024, 5, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/stg2.12156 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [29/10/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
502
- NUTKANI ET AL.

63. Soleimani, M., Kezunovic, M.: Mitigating transformer loss of life and Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM), pp. 1–5. Canada, Montreal
reducing the hazard of failure by the smart ev charging. IEEE Trans. Ind. (2020)
Appl. 56(5), 5974–5983 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/tia.2020. 71. Sindha, J.: Impact of battery swapping stations on EV adoption and its
2986990 contribution to peak load management. In: 2020 17th International
64. Du, G., et al.: An optimization model of EVs charging and discharging for Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), pp. 1–4. Stockholm
power system demand leveling. In: 2016 IEEE PES Asia‐Pacific Power (2020)
and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC), pp. 835–842 (2016) 72. An, Y., et al.: Optimal scheduling of electric vehicle charging operations
65. Suman, S., et al.: Electric vehicle owner preferred smart charge scheduling considering real‐time traffic condition and travel distance. Expert Syst.
of EV aggregator using pv generation. In: 2018 20th National Power Appl. 213, 118941 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118941
Systems Conference (NPSC), pp. 1–6. Tiruchirappalli, India (2018) 73. Nacmanson, W.J., Mancarella, P.: Recommendations for electric vehicle
66. Rezaeumozafar, M., Eskandari, M., Savkin, A.V.: A self‐optimizing integration. In: ENA‐C4NET ‐ EV Integration Project Report (2022)
scheduling model for large‐scale ev fleets in microgrids. IEEE Trans. 74. Ahmad, F., Khalid, M., Panigrahi, B.K.: An enhanced approach to
Ind. Inf. 17(12), 8177–8188 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/tii.2021. optimally place the solar powered electric vehicle charging station in
3064368 distribution network. J. Energy Storage 42, 103090 (2021). https://doi.
67. Kornsiriluk, V.: Study of energy storage system: concept of using ess in org/10.1016/j.est.2021.103090
EV charging stations in MEA. In: 2019 IEEE PES GTD Grand Inter- 75. Ahmad, F., et al.: EV charging station placement using nature‐inspired
national Conference and Exposition Asia (GTD Asia), pp. 697–700. optimisation algorithms. In: 2023 International Conference on Power,
Bangkok (2019) Instrumentation, Energy and Control (PIECON), pp. 1–6. Aligarh, India
68. Da, E.C., et al.: Assessment of distributed generation hosting capacity in (2023)
electric distribution systems by increasing the electric vehicle penetration.
In: 2021 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe (ISGT
Europe), pp. 01–05. Finland, Espoo (2021)
69. Alatise, O., et al.: Expanding EV charging capacity in distribution net- How to cite this article: Nutkani, I., et al.: Impact of
works: a case study for charging EVs at work. In: CIRED 2021 ‐ the 26th EV charging on electrical distribution network and
International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution, pp.
mitigating solutions – A review. IET Smart Grid. 7(5),
2945–2949. Virtual (2021)
70. Kamruzzaman, M., et al.: A method for maximizing the hosting capacity 485–502 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1049/stg2.12156
to electric vehicles using feeder reconfiguration. In: 2020 IEEE Power &