‭Hochschule Fresenius University of Applied Sciences‬

‭Faculty of Economics & Media‬

‭International Business School‬
‭International Business Management‬
‭Cologne Campus‬

‭Working Title‬

‭"‭E
‬ coCharge‬‭"‬

‭ ayam Rahmani Pour ,Student ID No.: 400309703‬

P
‭Venu Chaldiganahalli Manjunatha ,Student ID No.: 400342724‬
‭Murlidhar N Kopatkar ,Student ID No.: 400343421‬
‭3. Semester‬

‭ rganization Management‬
O
‭Lecturer: Prof. Dr. Mandt, Klotz‬
‭Due Date: Feb 05 2024‬
 ‭Tabel of Content‬

‭Initial situation & objective‬ ‭1‬

‭Project structure & planning‬ ‭2‬
‭Stakeholder management‬ ‭5‬
‭Risk analysis‬ ‭7‬
‭Classic vs. Agile Project Management‬ ‭9‬
‭Organizational structure‬ ‭20‬
‭Internal processes and culture‬ ‭22‬
‭Conclusion‬ ‭23‬
‭References‬ ‭24‬
‭Initial situation & objective‬
‭ t EcoCharge, we are at a crucial junction in our journey towards revolutionizing the‬
A
‭electric vehicle (EV) charging landscape. The EV market has seen a significant boom,‬
‭with global sales surpassing 10.2 million units in 2022, marking a 55% increase from the‬
‭previous year. Particularly noteworthy is Mainland China's dominance, boasting a nearly‬
‭58% market share. This surge is propelled by factors such as evolving government‬
‭policies, the appeal of Tesla's high-performance vehicles, decreasing battery costs, and‬
‭the advent of innovative concepts like Battery-as-a-Service. These elements have not‬
‭only bolstered the market but also reshaped the industry's appeal (Statista, 2023).‬

‭ espite this impressive growth, several challenges are impeding the broader adoption of‬
D
‭EVs. Key among these is the scarcity of infrastructure, particularly charging stations,‬
‭which are still sparse and varied in terms of suppliers and charging systems. Additionally,‬
‭the high upfront cost of EVs, predominantly driven by battery prices, makes them less‬
‭attractive compared to traditional internal combustion engine vehicles. The EV market is‬
‭still in an 'innovator' phase, with adoption rates around 14% of the overall car market in‬
‭2022. Concerns around range, price, and safety, coupled with a general reluctance to‬
‭move away from conventional vehicles, especially with the recent drop in oil prices, are‬
‭significant factors restraining further growth (Statista, 2023).‬

‭ rom 2010 to 2022, the price of battery packs has dropped by more than 87%, making‬
F
‭EVs increasingly affordable. Governments across the globe are using various incentives,‬
‭including tax exemptions, grants, subsidies, and non-financial benefits like dedicated‬
‭parking spaces, to encourage the purchase of EVs. However, these incentives vary by‬
‭country and might apply only in specific scenarios. For instance, in Japan, incentives are‬
‭available only to new vehicle owners. Notably, countries like the UK and France have set‬
‭ambitious targets to phase out ICE sales by 2040, while Mainland China has implemented‬
‭a new energy credit system that mandates car makers to meet certain sales quotas for EVs‬
‭(Statista, 2023).‬

I‭ n this context, EcoCharge's primary objective for the next six months is to capitalize on‬
‭the growing EV market by expanding our network of charging stations. We aim to‬
‭address the infrastructure gap by increasing the availability of charging options for EV‬
‭users. While doing so, we are aware of the need to navigate through the complexity of‬
‭market dynamics, evolving government policies, technological advancements, and‬
‭consumer perceptions. Our goal is not only to grow our network but also to contribute‬

‭1‬
s‭ ignificantly to the acceleration of the EV revolution, making sustainable transportation‬
‭more accessible and appealing to a broader audience.‬

‭Project structure & planning‬

‭ s we at EcoCharge delve into the expansion of our electric vehicle (EV) charging‬
A
‭network, it's vital to have a strategic project structure and plan. Drawing on‬
‭comprehensive research, including a study focused on the optimal deployment of public‬
‭charging infrastructure in high-density cities, we can shape our strategy to ensure our‬
‭expansion is both effective and responsive to the evolving EV landscape.‬

‭ he study by He et al. (2022) underscores the importance of a contextualized EV charger‬

T
‭optimization model that integrates supply-and-demand constraints and factors in‬
‭government policy and spatial constraints. For EcoCharge, this means conducting a‬
‭thorough analysis of potential charging sites, factoring in spatial distribution, and‬
‭considering local residents' EV purchase intentions. This approach ensures that we are‬
‭not just randomly placing charging stations but are doing so in areas where they will be‬
‭most needed and used. It's about being strategic and data-driven in our expansion to‬
‭minimize charging demand shortfall (‬‭charging demand‬‭that cannot be satisfied by‬
‭charging facilities)‬‭and travel time to our facilities.‬

‭ nderstanding EV charging demand is key to our project's success. This involves using‬
U
‭data sources like vehicle user attributes, trip origin-destination diaries, and vehicle flow‬
‭GPS data. Such detailed analysis helps us estimate charging demand across different‬
‭areas and adapt our strategy accordingly. Our aim is to ensure that our charging stations‬
‭are located where they are most needed, based on actual user behavior and preferences.‬

‭ inally, our model's development will be guided by the constraints identified in our‬
F
‭supply and demand analyses. This involves connecting EV charging demand projections‬
‭with existing and potential supply locations. By using a set of demand points, we can‬
‭determine the optimal number of chargers needed at each location and how to allocate‬
‭these resources most efficiently.‬

‭ igure 1 presents a summary of the methodological approach used in this research. The‬
F
‭process for allocating EV charging facilities involves two main parts: an analysis of the‬
‭supply side and an analysis of the demand side. The supply-side analysis focuses on‬
‭establishing the foundational requirements for setting up charging infrastructure, while‬
‭the demand-side analysis aims to forecast the spread and level of demand for EV‬

‭2‬
c‭ harging. The findings from these analyses, along with various constraints identified from‬
‭additional studies, are then applied to develop and address an optimization issue in our‬
‭location-allocation (LA) model. This is done to determine the most effective strategy for‬
‭rolling out our public EV charging stations.‬

‭Fig. 1.Workflow of proposed methodology (He et al. ,2022)‬

‭ urthermore, Hadian et al. (2020) present an optimal model for the placement of EV‬
F
‭charging stations. Their focus on peak shaving and valley filling is particularly relevant.‬
‭This means we should plan our charging station operations in a way that balances the‬
‭load on the electrical grid. By doing so, we can minimize operational costs and maximize‬
‭the efficiency of our charging stations. The idea of controlled charging modes and smart‬
‭charging/discharging schedules fits perfectly with our goal of offering convenient and‬
‭efficient charging solutions to our customers. Moreover, understanding the optimal profit‬
‭sharing between us and the system operators can guide us in making financially sound‬
‭decisions during our expansion.‬

‭3‬
‭ nce a comprehensive charging infrastructure is established, scheduling becomes‬
O
‭essential to manage the increasing demand efficiently, alleviate grid congestion, and‬
‭secure equitable benefits for all stakeholders. Studies focusing on scheduling often‬
‭prioritize distribution networks, sometimes at the expense of other stakeholder benefits.‬
‭There's a trend towards profit maximization and minimizing adverse impacts on‬
‭distribution networks while developing charging schedules. Dynamic pricing schemes‬
‭have been employed to address scheduling challenges by reducing charging costs.‬
‭However, these schemes might increase traffic congestion, affecting stakeholder‬
‭convenience, especially during off-peak hours. Improving stakeholder convenience‬
‭involves considering factors like load profile, capacity constraints, traffic flow, and‬
‭availability of charging ports. The integration of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) services and‬
‭intermittent renewable energy sources in EV charging station (EVCS) scheduling is‬
‭becoming increasingly important (Karmaker et al., 2023).‬

‭ e are acutely aware of the challenges that come with large-scale EV integration. One‬
W
‭major concern is the strain it can place on distribution networks, leading to issues like‬
‭power loss and voltage imbalances. To mitigate these challenges, we emphasize the‬
‭importance of strategic, data-driven deployment of our charging stations, rather than‬
‭random placement. This approach ensures that our expansion aligns with the capacity and‬
‭capabilities of the existing power infrastructure. Additionally, we recognize the need to‬
‭integrate transportation networks and user needs into our charging station placement‬
‭strategy. This integration is often overlooked in EV infrastructure development but is‬
‭crucial for creating an efficient and user-friendly network. Our aim is to develop a‬
‭network that is not just expansive but also smart and responsive to the varying needs and‬
‭habits of EV users across different regions, necessitating region-specific planning and‬
‭operational strategies (Karmaker et al., 2023).‬

I‭ n conclusion, EcoCharge's expansion plan is about much more than just adding new‬
‭charging stations. It's a carefully thought-out strategy that takes into account a myriad of‬
‭factors, from government policies and spatial planning to consumer behavior and demand‬
‭patterns. By leveraging these insights, we are positioning ourselves not just to grow our‬
‭network, but to do so in a way that is most beneficial to EV users and contributes to the‬
‭broader adoption of sustainable transportation solutions.‬

‭4‬
‭Stakeholder management‬
‭ t EcoCharge, as we expand our network of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations,‬
A
‭managing the diverse interests and needs of stakeholders is a critical aspect of our project‬
‭planning. The process involves a careful analysis of both primary and secondary‬
‭stakeholders, who have direct and indirect impacts on the project. The primary‬
‭stakeholders include local governments, distribution network operators, EV charging‬
‭station (EVCS) owners, transportation networks, and EV users. The secondary‬
‭stakeholders encompass the auto industry, community groups, environmental and‬
‭research institutions (Ashish et al., 2023).‬

I‭ n our project, a balanced approach to stakeholder management is essential.‬

‭Understanding and prioritizing the needs of each stakeholder group ensures that our‬
‭expansion strategy is not only effective but also well-supported and sustainable. Let's‬
‭delve into the details of each stakeholder group:‬

‭ . Local Governments:‬‭Local governments play a crucial‬‭role in the regulatory‬

1
‭landscape and have a vested interest in promoting sustainable transportation. They often‬
‭set large-scale targets for EV adoption and provide necessary infrastructure support. Our‬
‭engagement with local governments involves aligning our expansion plans with their‬
‭environmental and transportation policies, ensuring compliance with regulations, and‬
‭potentially collaborating on incentives for EV users.‬

‭ . Distribution Network Operators (DNOs):‬‭DNOs are‬‭responsible for managing the‬

2
‭energy supply and ensuring grid stability. With the increasing demand for electricity due‬
‭to EVs, it's critical to work closely with DNOs to manage the additional load on the grid.‬
‭This collaboration might involve scheduling charging during off-peak hours to reduce‬
‭grid strain or integrating renewable energy sources to support a sustainable energy‬
‭supply.‬

‭ . EVCS Owners:‬‭As owners of the charging infrastructure,‬‭we need to address concerns‬

3
‭about the profitability and operational efficiency of charging stations. This includes‬
‭optimizing the location and number of charging ports to maximize usage and revenue,‬
‭implementing dynamic pricing strategies to balance demand and supply, and ensuring‬
‭regular maintenance for uninterrupted service.‬

‭5‬
‭ . Transportation Networks:‬‭With the integration of EVs, transportation networks face‬
4
‭changes in traffic patterns and parking requirements. Our strategy should consider the‬
‭impact of charging stations on local traffic and parking, ensuring that they are‬
‭conveniently located to minimize congestion and are accessible to a broad range of users.‬

‭ . EV Users:‬‭The primary users of our services, their‬‭needs are paramount. User‬

5
‭concerns typically revolve around the availability, accessibility, and cost of charging. Our‬
‭focus is on expanding the network to areas with high EV usage, ensuring ease of access‬
‭and user-friendly interfaces, and maintaining competitive pricing.‬

‭ . Auto Industry:‬‭As manufacturers of EVs, their designs‬‭and technological‬

6
‭advancements directly affect charging requirements. Collaborating with the auto industry‬
‭can provide insights into future trends in EV technology, helping us to adapt our charging‬
‭infrastructure accordingly.‬

‭ . Community Groups:‬‭Local communities are impacted‬‭by the installation of charging‬

7
‭stations in terms of aesthetics, noise, and space usage. Engaging with community groups‬
‭to address their concerns and gain their support is crucial. This might involve community‬
‭consultations before installing new charging stations or collaborating on community‬
‭benefits related to sustainable transportation.‬

‭ . Environmental and Research Institutions:‬‭These‬‭institutions offer valuable insights‬

8
‭into sustainable practices and technological advancements. Collaborating with them can‬
‭aid in adopting environmentally friendly technologies and practices in our charging‬
‭stations.‬

‭ . Other Indirect Stakeholders:‬‭These include policymakers,‬‭investors, and utility‬

9
‭providers. Keeping these groups informed and engaged can help in securing support and‬
‭investment for our expansion projects and ensuring that our services align with broader‬
‭energy and environmental goals.‬

I‭ n conclusion, a balanced stakeholder management approach at EcoCharge involves‬

‭understanding each stakeholder's unique needs and concerns and addressing them through‬
‭careful planning, collaboration, and communication. By doing so, we aim to build a‬
‭charging network that not only supports the growth of EVs but also contributes positively‬
‭to the communities and environments in which we operate.‬

‭6‬
‭Risk analysis‬
I‭ n crafting the risk analysis for EcoCharge, based on the comprehensive insights from‬
‭research, it's clear that several key factors need to be considered. The aim is to identify‬
‭potential risks, from technological advancements, power grid Integration, policy‬
‭environment, market structure, financial challenges, safety and well-being of‬
‭maintenance staff and users to regulatory changes, and help in formulating strategies to‬
‭mitigate these risks while capitalizing on emerging opportunities in the EV charging‬
‭sector.‬

‭ afety and Reliability:‬‭The criteria necessary for‬‭effective risk management in the‬

S
‭context of EV charging stations, as outlined in the Buica (2022), are applicable to‬
‭manufacturers, users, and maintenance entities. These criteria encompass a broad range‬
‭of considerations, including adherence to safety and technical standards, identification‬
‭and mitigation of risks specific to electric vehicle charging, and the implementation of‬
‭comprehensive safety measures. These measures are designed to ensure the safety and‬
‭reliability of the charging infrastructure for all stakeholders involved. By integrating‬
‭these criteria into the design, operation, and maintenance of charging stations, the aim is‬
‭to enhance overall safety and reduce potential hazards.‬

‭ echnological Advancements:‬‭The challenge of technological‬‭advancements in the‬

T
‭context of EV charging infrastructure is multi-dimensional. It includes the development‬
‭of faster and more efficient charging technologies, such as ultra-fast charging systems,‬
‭which significantly reduce charging time and improve user convenience. Additionally,‬
‭there's the challenge of standardization across different EV models and charging systems,‬
‭ensuring compatibility and ease of use for consumers. The integration of smart charging‬
‭technologies, which allow for better management of charging loads and integration with‬
‭renewable energy sources, is another key area. Moreover, advancements in battery‬
‭technology, such as solid-state batteries, could lead to changes in charging requirements‬
‭and infrastructure. Keeping up with these technological trends and integrating them into‬
‭our charging infrastructure is crucial for EcoCharge to remain competitive and provide a‬
‭seamless charging experience to our customers (‬‭Mastoi et al., 2022‬‭).‬

‭ ower Grid Integration:‬‭Integrating EV charging infrastructure‬‭into the power grid‬

P
‭presents several complex challenges. As the number of electric vehicles increases, so‬
‭does the demand for electricity, potentially leading to a significant strain on the power‬
‭grid. This requires careful management to ensure grid stability and prevent overloading.‬

‭7‬
‭ he integration also involves incorporating renewable energy sources effectively,‬
T
‭balancing the intermittent nature of these sources with the constant demand from EV‬
‭charging stations. Smart grid technologies, which allow for real-time monitoring and‬
‭management of power flow, play a crucial role in this integration. Furthermore, the‬
‭development of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) systems, where EVs can feed energy back into the‬
‭grid, adds another layer of complexity but also potential benefits in terms of energy‬
‭storage and grid balancing. Addressing these challenges involves close collaboration‬
‭between utility providers, government bodies, and EV infrastructure companies (‬‭Mastoi‬
‭et al., 2022‬‭).‬

‭ olicy and Regulatory Environment:‬‭The Policy and‬‭Regulatory Environment‬

P
‭surrounding EV charging infrastructure is a complex and rapidly evolving landscape.‬
‭This involves navigating through various regulations that govern the installation,‬
‭operation, and safety standards of EV charging stations. There are challenges in aligning‬
‭with national and international standards, adapting to changing policies related to‬
‭renewable energy integration, and complying with environmental regulations.‬
‭Additionally, government incentives, subsidies, and funding programs for EV‬
‭infrastructure development can vary widely between regions and over time.‬
‭Understanding and leveraging these policies effectively is crucial for the strategic‬
‭planning and deployment of EV charging stations. It's also important to stay ahead of‬
‭potential future regulatory changes that could impact the EV charging market (‬‭Mastoi et‬
‭al., 2022‬‭).‬

‭ arket Structure:‬‭The market structure for EV charging‬‭infrastructure is influenced by‬

M
‭various factors, including consumer preferences, competition, economic conditions, and‬
‭technological advancements. Consumer preferences are evolving, with increasing‬
‭demand for faster, more convenient charging options. This drives competition among EV‬
‭charging companies to innovate and offer superior services. Economic factors, like the‬
‭cost of electricity and the initial investment required for charging infrastructure, play a‬
‭significant role in shaping the market. Technological advancements, such as the‬
‭development of more efficient charging technologies and battery systems, also impact the‬
‭market structure by changing the economics and logistics of EV charging. Navigating this‬
‭complex market requires a deep understanding of these factors and a strategic approach‬
‭to positioning and differentiating services in the market (‬‭Mastoi et al., 2022‬‭).‬

‭ inancial Risks:‬‭understanding and managing financial‬‭risks is crucial for our expansion‬

F
‭in the EV charging infrastructure market.The financial dynamics in the context of EV‬

‭8‬
c‭ harging infrastructure, as outlined in the‬ ‭Andrews et al., (2020)‬‭, refer to the economic‬
‭aspects of integrating EV charging systems with the power grid. These dynamics include‬
‭potential revenue streams from offering grid services through‬‭vehicle-to-grid(‬‭V2G)‬
‭technologies, managing the costs associated with setting up and operating EV charging‬
‭stations, and navigating the financial implications of evolving market conditions and‬
‭regulatory environments. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for EcoCharge to‬
‭effectively manage financial risks and capitalize on emerging opportunities in the EV‬
‭charging market.‬

‭Classic vs. Agile Project Management‬

I‭ n today’s rapidly changing business environment, two distinct approaches to project‬
‭management have emerged: the agile approach and the classical approach. Both have‬
‭their unique characteristics and applicability depending on the nature of the project and‬
‭the organizational context.‬

‭ gility, a term increasingly prevalent in all areas of business, emphasizes flexibility in‬
A
‭response to changing market situations and uncertainties. The concept of agility gained‬
‭popularity in the early 1990s, primarily within the IT sector, due to its dynamic and‬
‭flexible nature in managing projects and processes. According to Highsmith, agility is the‬
‭capacity for dynamic, flexible management and steering of projects, enabling rapid‬
‭response to changes in turbulent market conditions. Termer and Nissen define agility as‬
‭the ability to create flexibility proactively, often before a situation necessitates it. This‬
‭approach requires a high level of communication within a network of individuals, where‬
‭networking, flexibility, and trust are paramount (Janowski, 2021).‬

‭Figure 2. Agile scaling based on the existing characteristics in companies(Janowski,‬

‭2021)‬

I‭ n contrast, the classical approach to project management is more structured and linear. It‬
‭is characterized by a sequential, phased process that is highly plan-driven. Traditional‬
‭project management methodologies are non-iterative and often rely on extensive‬

‭9‬
‭ lanning, making outcomes more predictable. This approach suits projects where goals‬
p
‭and paths are clearly defined from the outset and where changes are less frequent and‬
‭more manageable (Janowski, 2021).‬

‭The agility and classical approaches differ significantly in several aspects:‬

‭ lexibility vs. Structure:‬‭Agile management thrives on flexibility and adaptability,‬

F
‭suited for projects in dynamic environments where requirements and goals evolve. In‬
‭contrast, the classical approach is more structured, following a predefined plan with less‬
‭scope for changes.‬

‭ eadership and Team Dynamics:‬‭Agile projects often feature a more collaborative‬

L
‭leadership style, where the project manager acts more as a facilitator than a director. The‬
‭classical approach, however, usually sees the project manager as the primary‬
‭decision-maker, with a top-down approach to management.‬

‭ esponse to Change:‬‭Agile methodologies are designed to accommodate and embrace‬

R
‭change, even late in the development process. Classical methodologies, being more rigid,‬
‭tend to resist changes, especially when they occur late in the project.‬

‭ ommunication and Networking:‬‭Agile project management emphasizes continuous‬

C
‭communication and feedback loops within a team and with stakeholders. The classical‬
‭approach may involve less frequent communication, often restricted to reporting on‬
‭milestones and deliverables.‬

‭ roject Outcome and Delivery:‬‭Agile projects aim for incremental delivery of products,‬
P
‭allowing for adjustments along the way. In classical project management, the entire‬
‭project is often delivered at once, at the end of the project timeline.‬

‭ hile the agile approach offers flexibility and adaptability, making it suitable for projects‬
W
‭in rapidly changing environments, the classical approach provides structure and‬
‭predictability, better suited for projects with well-defined goals and minimal changes.‬
‭The choice between agile and classical methodologies depends on the specific needs and‬
‭circumstances of the project and the organization (Janowski, 2021).‬

‭10‬
‭Figure 3.Structural Differences of the Waterfall model and Agile model‬‭(Janowski, 2021)‬‭.‬

I‭ n our EcoCharge project, we follow a detailed checklist from the ROUTES Initiative‬
‭(2023) for effective planning of electric vehicle infrastructure, including Electric Vehicle‬
‭Supply Equipment (EVSE). An overview of this checklist is illustrated, with further‬
‭sections elaborating on each aspect.‬

‭ rimarily designed for site-level planning, this checklist is crucial for those responsible‬
P
‭for determining the size, cost, and execution plans of charging sites. Additionally, certain‬
‭elements like site selection and electric grid planning are equally significant for broader‬
‭community-level or corridor planners, as high-level planning decisions can impact the‬
‭selection of potential charging locations.‬

‭11‬
I‭ t’s important to note, as highlighted in the ROUTES Initiative’s Guiding Principles for‬
‭Planning and Implementation, that this checklist isn’t a sequence of steps to be followed‬
‭in order. Rather, it requires site-level planners at EcoCharge to consider multiple aspects‬
‭simultaneously and be open to revisiting various elements during the planning phase.‬

‭Figure 4. EVSE Project Planning Checklist (ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬

‭ stablish Overall Project Scale:‬‭In our EcoCharge‬‭project, a key step is to establish the‬
E
‭overall project scale, which can be approached through agile project management‬
‭methodologies. This involves determining the scope, preliminary budget, timeline, and‬
‭funding mechanism of the project. It's important for site-level planners at EcoCharge to‬
‭be prepared for ongoing adjustments to the project scale as they gain a deeper‬
‭understanding of the costs and site-specific constraints.‬

‭ o lay the groundwork for initial project scoping discussions, planners should estimate‬
T
‭the current and future interest or demand for EV charging. They should also acquaint‬
‭themselves with the various types of EV chargers, their approximate costs, and any‬
‭available funding options. Technical guidance on assessing EV charging needs and‬
‭methods for incorporating community, are integral to this stage. This holistic approach‬

‭12‬
e‭ nsures that our project planning is both comprehensive and responsive to evolving needs‬
‭and opportunities‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ etermine Site and Installation Type:‬‭In our EcoCharge‬‭project, determining the site‬
D
‭and installation type for EV charging stations is a crucial step that can be executed using‬
‭classic project management approaches. Site-level planners at EcoCharge collaborate‬
‭with regional coalitions in a top-down planning approach to pinpoint the optimal location‬
‭for a charging station. In order to ensure that our efforts are in line with overall‬
‭objectives, high-level coordination is essential for integrating our EV infrastructure‬
‭planning with larger community- or corridor-level activities, including meeting‬
‭community needs more equitably.‬

‭ dditionally, specific technical, economic, and regulatory factors at each potential site‬
A
‭must be evaluated during the initial site selection process. We recognize that some‬
‭planning steps outlined later in this chapter might pose challenges that could restrict site‬
‭selection options. Therefore, before choosing a site, it is important to undertake‬
‭preliminary feasibility studies based on these processes. For instance, early discussions‬
‭with local utilities can help us identify and steer clear of sites that might pose significant‬
‭challenges or incur excessive costs for the installation of EV charging stations. This‬
‭strategic approach ensures that our site selection process is both thorough and adaptable‬
‭to potential constraints and opportunities‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

I‭ dentify Project Partners:‬‭For our EcoCharge project, identifying project partners is a‬

‭crucial step that aligns well with the classic project management approach. This entails‬
‭working together with important parties including municipal, tribal, or regional coalitions‬
‭as well as energy utilities. The partnership with local utilities is particularly vital for rural‬
‭projects, where electric grid capacity often poses a challenge. Early engagement with‬
‭regional utilities is important to understand their EV-related policies, programs, and any‬
‭constraints specific to the project. Additionally, verifying that possible installation‬
‭locations are inside the utility's service area is crucial.‬

‭ oreover, utility alliances at the local and regional levels can be instrumental partners,‬
M
‭offering technical expertise essential for rural EV infrastructure projects. These‬
‭coalitions, along with individual utility members, play a supportive role in fostering‬
‭adoption of EVs in their localities. Other local entities experienced in EV charging‬
‭projects can also provide valuable insights and lessons. Local Clean Cities coordinators‬
‭are useful contacts to facilitate these connections, helping to establish a robust network of‬

‭13‬
‭ artners for the project. By following a classic project management approach, we ensure‬
p
‭a structured and comprehensive process in identifying and collaborating with these‬
‭essential partners‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ ecide on Ownership Model:‬‭In our EcoCharge project,‬‭deciding on the ownership‬

D
‭model of the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) and related electrical‬
‭infrastructure is a critical step best suited to the classic project management approach.‬
‭Site-level planners must determine whether the utility or the utility customer (which‬
‭could be the site host, a different entity, such a charging network provider, or a property‬
‭owner or tenant) will own, operate, and maintain the EVSE.‬

‭ hen third-party entities own and operate the EVSE, The site host may gain from‬
W
‭increased foot traffic even though they do not directly earn from the charging station‬
‭income. For instance, EV drivers might patronize a retailer's business while their vehicles‬
‭are charging.‬

‭ he ownership agreements between the utility and the site host or third party might take‬
T
‭several forms:‬

‭ raditional Approach: All equipment and wiring from the public electricity lines to the‬
T
‭facility, including the meter, are provided by the utility. The customer is responsible for‬
‭all additional wiring and the EVSE. This model offers full ownership and control to the‬
‭site host or third party but requires significant upfront investment.‬

‭ ake Ready Model: The utility installs, owns, and maintains all wiring up to the EVSE‬
M
‭interface, including any service or meter upgrades. This option is favorable for sites‬
‭unwilling or unable to afford to update the wiring, as the utility absorbs these costs.‬

‭ VSE Only Model: The utility installs and owns only the EVSE, a cost-effective option‬
E
‭when the site already has the necessary wiring.‬

‭ ull Ownership Model: The utility owns and maintains everything, including‬
F
‭transformers, meters, wiring, and the EVSE. In this model, the utility manages the‬
‭charging fees. This approach is often preferred for large investments like DC Fast‬
‭Charging (DCFC) installations, ensuring public access and long-term functionality .‬

‭14‬
‭ he ownership and management of EV charging infrastructure by utilities is heavily‬
T
‭influenced by state rules. These rules differ and have an effect on possible business plans‬
‭and agreements between electric companies, site operators, and charging station‬
‭providers. Additionally, the financial sustainability and desirability of EV charging sites‬
‭can be impacted by different state taxes and levies on the power they sell. For site-level‬
‭planners considering models involving utility ownership or operation of EVSE, early‬
‭discussions with local utilities about available options are recommended‬‭(ROUTES‬
‭Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ ssess EV Charging Needs:‬‭In our EcoCharge project,‬‭assessing EV charging needs is a‬

A
‭vital step that aligns well with the agile project management approach. This involves‬
‭evaluating:‬

‭ he total expected demand for charging, such as the number and types of vehicles‬
T
‭anticipated daily. This assessment helps in determining if the installation's business case‬
‭is supported by the anticipated demand.‬

‭ he demand profile, i.e., whether the charging demand will be constant throughout the‬
T
‭day or experience peaks at specific times. Peak demand times should be accommodated‬
‭in the installations' design.‬

‭ eak demand should be taken into consideration when EcoCharge site planners design‬
P
‭the installation size and project scope and explore methods to mitigate these peaks, like‬
‭shifting charging times to less busy periods.‬

‭ ocal or Tribal utilities may offer additional insights on reducing peak demand. These‬
L
‭can include integrating energy storage solutions like on-site batteries and implementing‬
‭smart charging strategies that adjust charging speeds and times for cost-effective demand‬
‭management‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

I‭ dentify Needs for Permitting and Regulatory Compliance:‬‭In our EcoCharge project,‬
‭identifying the needs for permitting and regulatory compliance is essential and best suited‬
‭to a classic project management approach. This involves:‬

‭●‬ U
‭ nderstanding the regulatory requirements and securing the necessary permits. EV‬
‭infrastructure projects must adhere to environmental laws and regulations.‬
‭Because of their modest footprints and little likelihood of having a substantial‬

‭15‬
 i‭mpact on wetlands, cultural and historical resources, or wildlife habitats, the‬
‭majority of these projects usually only require a basic level of environmental‬
‭study.‬
‭●‬ ‭Complying with Federal, State, Tribal, and local laws and regulations.To guarantee‬
‭compliance throughout the project's lifespan, it's critical to confer with local and‬
‭tribal officials as particular regulations may differ depending on the community or‬
‭kind of site.‬
‭●‬ ‭Local governments might also need to review and revise current construction rules‬
‭and laws to allow for the installation of EV chargers in the future.‬
‭●‬ ‭Ensuring accessibility in line with public service guidelines, even if specific‬
‭regulations or standards are not in place. Easy access to equipment with‬
‭user-friendly controls and sufficient room for drivers with disabilities to get in and‬
‭out of their cars are requirements for ADA-compliant EV charging installations.‬
‭Furthermore, the location of EVSEs should allow those with impairments to use‬
‭nearby sidewalks in a safe and comfortable manner.‬
‭Adhering to these requirements ensures that our EV charging stations are not only legally‬
‭compliant but also accessible and environmentally responsible‬‭(ROUTES Initiative‬
‭,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ ssess Local Grid Infrastructure:‬‭In our EcoCharge‬‭project, assessing local grid‬

A
‭infrastructure aligns with the agile project management approach and is crucial,‬
‭particularly when coordinating with local utilities. This step is vital, especially in rural‬
‭areas where grid infrastructure may require upgrades to support EV charging needs.‬
‭Early coordination with utilities is essential to address necessary electrical supply‬
‭upgrades and prevent costly delays. Furthermore, without requiring major infrastructure‬
‭improvements, hybrid systems that combine grid and off-grid electricity can fulfill peak‬
‭needs and enable higher-power charging. In difficult-to-reach places, integrating batteries‬
‭with the site's current low-power supply is an additional way to facilitate quick charging‬
‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ etermine Electricity Rates and Pricing Structures:‬‭In the EcoCharge project,‬

D
‭determining electricity rates and pricing structures is crucial, best handled through a‬
‭classic project management approach. Early coordination with utilities is necessary to‬
‭understand electricity pricing, which significantly affects the financial viability of EVSE‬
‭installations. This includes understanding basic electricity pricing differences (such as‬
‭rates for residential vs. commercial customers), as well as more complex aspects like‬
‭demand charges and time-of-use rates.‬

‭16‬
‭ emand charges assist utilities in defraying the expense of peak demand infrastructure.‬
D
‭These charges are frequently imposed on commercial and industrial users. These fees,‬
‭which range from $3 to $40 per kW on average, are determined by taking the maximum‬
‭power consumed at any given point in a billing period. For example, peak demands‬
‭resulting from using an EV charger longer than allowed by a utility, even by 15 minutes‬
‭per month, might result in significant extra charges. These fees may discourage the usage‬
‭of EV chargers, especially if they make individual charging sessions much more‬
‭expensive.‬

‭ ime-of-use rates offer reduced costs during off-peak hours, encouraging EV charging‬
T
‭when grid demand is low, which helps utilities manage their overall demand profile more‬
‭effectively‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ etermine Procurement Process:‬‭For our EcoCharge project, determining the‬

D
‭procurement process is a step that aligns with the classic project management approach.‬
‭This step is especially relevant for public agencies and entities bound by formal‬
‭procurement processes or guidelines for acquiring EVSE equipment and services. These‬
‭rules or guidelines could influence other planning aspects. Localities may also benefit‬
‭from purchasing EVSE through established State contracts, potentially offering cost‬
‭savings compared to individual contract bidding. The timing of EVSE procurement is‬
‭another critical factor, particularly for fleet transitions to EVs. To guarantee that the‬
‭infrastructure is set up and running before the cars arrive, it is imperative to purchase‬
‭EVSE far in advance of the vehicle procurement process‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ etermine Communications Network Connection Needs:‬‭In the EcoCharge project,‬

D
‭deciding on the communications network connection needs for charging stations is a‬
‭crucial step, best suited for a classic project management approach. We need to choose‬
‭between networked and non-networked chargers.‬

‭ etworked chargers offer advanced features like internet or cellular connectivity for‬
N
‭credit card payments, smartphone app integration, utilization data transmission, remote‬
‭customer service, and firmware updates. They open up possibilities for vehicle-to-grid‬
‭integration (VGI), such as unidirectional control (V1G) for managing charging rates and‬
‭reducing demand peaks, and bi-directional vehicle-to-grid (V2G) capabilities for‬
‭additional grid services.‬

‭17‬
‭ on-networked chargers, on the other hand,offer simple charging without access to the‬
N
‭internet or sophisticated capabilities. Payment for these chargers must be arranged‬
‭through alternative means (like an attendant or a nearby establishment), or they might‬
‭offer free charging.‬

I‭ n remote areas, challenges like Inadequate cell phone or broadband connectivity might‬
‭make networked station installation challenging. In such cases, if the lack of connectivity‬
‭hinders the ability to monitor usage and participate in demand response programs,‬
‭utilities might offer special rates to help site hosts manage demand charges‬‭(ROUTES‬
‭Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ elect Equipment and Network Provider:‬‭For our EcoCharge‬‭project, selecting‬

S
‭equipment and network providers is a task that fits well with the agile project‬
‭management approach. Providers play a crucial role in informing us about different EV‬
‭charger types, needs, and capabilities. To assist in choosing the right equipment and‬
‭network, tools like the Go Electric Drive’s “EVSE Products, Charging Network and‬
‭Service Providers” are valuable for comparing current market options. Additionally,‬
‭reaching out to major industry associations is an effective method for locating reliable‬
‭providers‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ ssess Installation Needs and Costs:‬‭In our EcoCharge project, assessing installation‬
A
‭needs and costs is best approached with a classic project management methodology. This‬
‭involves determining the types and quantities of EV chargers based on charging demand,‬
‭siting, and electrical capacity. It's important to consider the types of chargers (Level 1,‬
‭Level 2, and DCFC), their voltages, billing schedules, as well as initial and continuous‬
‭expenses.‬

‭ he International Council on Clean Transportation said in 2019 that although prices vary,‬
T
‭networked Level 2 chargers for a single port run around $6,000 and $11,000 for a‬
‭dual-port. Non-networked chargers are less expensive. DCFC units typically range from‬
‭$70,000 to $120,000. Installation costs depend on factors like trenching distance and‬
‭local labor costs and can decrease with the installation of multiple chargers at once.‬

‭ thorough cost assessment should also consider upgrades to on-site electrical wiring and‬
A
‭consultations with certified electrical contractors. Certified contractors' availability varies‬
‭by state, and equipment or network providers can help locate qualified installers‬
‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭18‬
‭ ssess Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs:‬‭In‬‭our EcoCharge project,‬
A
‭assessing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs is a crucial aspect that fits well with‬
‭the classic project management approach. Early estimates of these costs are key for‬
‭financial planning and ensuring project viability. Charging stations require regular‬
‭maintenance, including inspections, repairs, cleaning, and cable management.‬
‭Post-warranty repairs can be expensive, so it's important to define who will bear these‬
‭costs and set clear expectations in maintenance contracts.‬

‭ or preliminary planning, the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) suggests budgeting‬
F
‭$400 per charger annually for maintenance. $300 is the cost for public Level 2 stations,‬
‭while $1,000 to $2,000 is the cost for Level 3 stations, according to a 2014 RMI study.‬
‭Demand fees, time-of-use rates, and the utility's pricing structure will all affect the‬
‭overall cost of power.‬

‭ dditionally, EV charging station operators may incur fees for network services like‬
A
‭pricing management, charger access, data collection, and analysis. These fees can reach‬
‭up to $250 to $300 per charging port annually, as noted by the California Energy‬
‭Commission’s EVSE Selection Guide. Credit card fees, often a small percentage of‬
‭transactions, may also apply, even if the network provider may offer them in their service‬
‭package‬‭(ROUTES Initiative ,2023)‬‭.‬

‭ etermine Pricing, Payment, and Access:‬‭In our EcoCharge‬‭project, determining‬

D
‭pricing, payment, and access for EVSE involves decisions that can be effectively‬
‭managed using either an agile or classic project management approach. EVSE owners‬
‭and operators need to decide on pricing models (like per kWh or per time unit), payment‬
‭methods (at the unit, phone, or adjacent business), and access (membership-based or‬
‭open).‬

‭ V charger owners and operators who host websites usually establish their own rates.‬
E
‭Because Level 1 and Level 2 chargers have reduced ownership and operating expenses,‬
‭they are frequently given away for free. For instance, workplaces or hotels might offer‬
‭complimentary Level 1 or Level 2 charging. Alternatively, site hosts can charge for EV‬
‭charging to offset electricity costs or make a profit, especially with DC fast chargers.‬

‭ rice setting should consider customer availability to compare prices and reviews of‬
P
‭nearby chargers through mobile apps. For non-networked chargers lacking payment‬

‭19‬
c‭ ollection capabilities, payment can be managed through RFID, mobile apps, or in-person‬
‭methods.‬

‭ hargers owned by network companies often follow different pricing models. Some, like‬
C
‭Blink, use a hybrid model, sharing costs and revenues between the site host and network.‬
‭Others, like ChargePoint, Greenlots, and Blink, offer subscription-based agreements‬
‭where the network provider takes care of setup and upkeep, while the site's owner pays a‬
‭yearly fee.‬

I‭ t's important to note that state regulations can vary, with some classifying charging‬
‭station operators as public utilities, influencing pricing strategies‬‭(ROUTES Initiative‬
‭,2023)‬‭.‬

I‭ n our EcoCharge project, although some of these elements may not pose significant‬
‭challenges to implementation, it's beneficial to recognize any extra requirements early on‬
‭and incorporate them into our comprehensive planning process.‬

‭Organizational structure‬
‭ he organizational structure of EcoCharge, which aims to build and manage a nationwide‬
T
‭network of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, can significantly influence the‬
‭effectiveness of its operations and strategy implementation. The organizational structure‬
‭defines how activities such as task allocation, coordination, and supervision are directed‬
‭toward achieving organizational goals.Study perform by Kenton (2020) define how‬
‭different structural aspects impact the organization:‬

‭ entralization vs. Decentralization:‬‭Centralization‬‭can streamline decision-making and‬

C
‭maintain consistency in policies and practices across the network. However, it may slow‬
‭down responsiveness to local market conditions.‬
‭Decentralization allows for quicker adaptation to local needs and market conditions,‬
‭which is critical in a diverse and geographically spread out market like EV charging‬
‭stations. Local managers can make decisions best suited for their area.‬

‭ unctional vs. Divisional Structure:‬‭A functional‬‭structure organizes the company‬

F
‭based on specialized functions such as marketing, finance, operations, etc. This can lead‬
‭to operational efficiencies but might create silos that hinder cross-functional‬
‭collaboration.‬

‭20‬
‭ divisional structure, which could be based on geographic regions, types of services, or‬
A
‭customer segments, might be more suitable for EcoCharge. It allows for a focus on‬
‭specific markets or types of charging stations (e.g., fast-charging vs. standard), enhancing‬
‭service quality and customer satisfaction.‬

‭ etwork Structure:‬‭Given the expansive nature of a‬‭nationwide network, a networked‬

N
‭approach where the company collaborates with various partners (like energy suppliers,‬
‭retail locations, local governments) could be beneficial. This structure can provide‬
‭flexibility and access to various resources and competencies.‬

‭ aving a well-defined organizational structure is immensely beneficial for us at‬

H
‭EcoCharge. This structure isn't just about establishing who's in charge; it's a fundamental‬
‭way for us to outline how we compensate our team members. By having this structure,‬
‭we can clearly define the salary grades and ranges for each role within our company.‬

‭ his organization goes beyond pay; it's about making our operations more efficient and‬
T
‭effective. By dividing our workforce and their responsibilities into distinct departments,‬
‭we can manage multiple operations simultaneously without a hitch.‬

‭ oreover, this clear structure is a roadmap for our employees, guiding them on how to‬
M
‭excel in their roles. In a hierarchy‬‭setup, for instance‬‭,‬‭it's essential for team members to‬
‭build strong relationships with those who make decisions. On the flip side, in areas where‬
‭we're more decentralized, our employees are expected to be proactive and bring‬
‭innovative solutions to the table. This setup not only helps our employees understand‬
‭how they can grow and develop their skills within EcoCharge but also makes it easier for‬
‭potential new hires to see if they'd fit well with our approach and culture (Kenton ,2020).‬

‭Internal processes and culture‬

I‭n EcoCharge, we understand that our internal processes and the culture we foster are‬
‭deeply interconnected, playing a vital role in the success of our projects. Our internal‬
‭processes are essentially the backbone of how we plan, carry out, keep an eye on, and‬
‭manage everything we do. They're the methods and systems that guide our daily‬
‭operations and long-term strategies (Ivancevich, 2014).‬

‭ t the same time, our culture is the heartbeat of EcoCharge. It's the set of shared values,‬
A
‭beliefs, and behaviors that define how we work together and interact with everyone‬
‭involved in our projects, from team members to stakeholders. It's about creating an‬

‭21‬
‭ nvironment where everyone feels part of the mission and is motivated to contribute‬
e
‭their best (Ivancevich, 2014).‬‭We've got a few key‬‭things in place to make sure we stay‬
‭on track and deliver our projects on time.‬

‭ irst up, we're big on keeping everyone in the loop. Good communication means‬
F
‭everyone knows what's going on, what they need to do, and when. It helps avoid mix-ups‬
‭and keeps us all heading in the same direction. When it comes to making decisions, we‬
‭like to keep it snappy but smart. This helps us react quickly to any new challenges or‬
‭opportunities that come our way.‬

‭ ur approach to managing the project is pretty structured. We've got a system that lines‬
O
‭up all our tasks and deadlines, so we always know what's next. But it's not just about‬
‭ticking boxes – we're always checking in on how we're doing and if we need to tweak‬
‭anything to stay on course. And we're all ears for feedback, whether it's from our own‬
‭team or from outside. It's a great way to spot any issues and sort them out fast.‬

‭ ow, about our culture – it's all about working together. We're a team, and when we‬
N
‭combine our efforts, we're unstoppable. We're always encouraging new ideas and ways of‬
‭doing things. The world of EV charging is always changing, so being open to new ideas‬
‭and ready to adapt is key.‬

‭ e also take responsibility for our work seriously. Everyone owns their part of the‬
W
‭project, and that really helps in getting things done efficiently. And since we're all about‬
‭electric vehicles, we keep our customers front and center in everything we do. It's their‬
‭needs that drive our project forward.‬

‭ astly, we never stop learning. Keeping up with the latest in our field means we can bring‬
L
‭the best to our project.‬

‭ o, there you have it. It's this blend of practical processes and a dynamic, collaborative‬
S
‭culture that keeps EcoCharge moving forward, making sure we deliver our projects not‬
‭just on time, but with quality that our customers expect.‬

‭Conclusion‬
I‭n the next six months at EcoCharge, we're taking a balanced approach. We're‬
‭expanding our charging network, strategically picking locations where they're most‬

‭22‬
‭ eeded, considering who lives there, how many people use electric vehicles, and what‬
n
‭the local rules are. Working with local governments and other important people will be‬
‭key to making sure our plans line up with theirs and getting their support.‬

‭ e're also keeping up with new tech and market trends to make sure our charging‬
W
‭solutions are top-notch and user-friendly. Managing our finances well and talking to‬
‭investors is another big part of our plan. We want to show them how we can grow and‬
‭keep things running smoothly, which should help bring in more investment.‬

‭ inally, we're really focusing on being sustainable. This means not just how we run our‬
F
‭business, but also encouraging more people to use electric vehicles. It's all about‬
‭growing, making smart partnerships, staying up-to-date with tech, keeping our finances‬
‭in check, and caring for the environment. We're excited to drive the electric vehicle‬
‭revolution with a smart and thoughtful strategy.‬

‭References‬
‭Andrews, Daniel J., et al. “Enterprise Risk and Resilience of Electric-Vehicle Charging‬
‭Infrastructure and the Future Mobile Power Grid.”‬‭Current Sustainable/Renewable‬
‭Energy Reports‬‭, vol. 7, no. 1, 14 Jan. 2020, pp. 9–15,‬
‭https://doi.org/10.1007/s40518-020-00144-6.‬
‭Ashish Kumar Karmaker, et al. “Multi-Stakeholder Perspectives for Transport‬
‭Electrification: A Review on Placement and Scheduling of Electric Vehicle‬
‭Charging Infrastructure.”‬‭Journal of Cleaner Production‬‭,‬‭vol. 427, 1 Nov. 2023,‬
‭pp. 139145–139145, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139145.‬

‭23‬
‭Buica, Georgeta, et al. “Occupational Risk Management of Equipment Intended for‬
‭Charging Electric Vehicles.”‬‭MATEC Web of Conferences‬‭,‬‭vol. 354, 2022, p.‬
‭00004, https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/202235400004.‬
‭Hadian, Emad, et al. “Optimal Allocation of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations with‬
‭Adopted Smart Charging/Discharging Schedule.”‬‭IEEE‬‭Access‬‭, vol. 8, 2020, pp.‬
‭196908–196919, https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.3033662.‬
‭He, Sylvia Y., et al. “The Spatial Planning of Public Electric Vehicle Charging‬
‭Infrastructure in a High-Density City Using a Contextualised Location-Allocation‬
‭Model.”‬‭Transportation Research Part A: Policy and‬‭Practice‬‭, vol. 160, June‬
‭2022, pp. 21–44, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2022.02.012.‬
‭Ivancevich, John, et al.‬‭Organizational Behavior &‬‭Management‬‭. McGraw-Hill, 2014.‬
‭Janowski, Nurgul. “Agile Approach versus Classical Approach in Project Management‬
‭with Regard to Leadership Change.”‬‭Humanities and‬‭Social Sciences: Latvia‬‭, vol.‬
‭29, no. 1, June 2021, pp. 114–132, https://doi.org/10.22364/hssl.29.1.07.‬
‭Kenton, Will. “How Organizational Structures Work.”‬‭Investopedia‬‭, 1 July 2020,‬
‭www.investopedia.com/terms/o/organizational-structure.asp#:~:text=An%20organ‬
‭izational%20structure%20is%20a. Accessed 28 Jan. 2024.‬
‭Mastoi, Muhammad Shahid, et al. “An In-Depth Analysis of Electric Vehicle Charging‬
‭Station Infrastructure, Policy Implications, and Future Trends.”‬‭Energy Reports‬‭,‬
‭vol. 8, Nov. 2022, pp. 11504–11529, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.09.011.‬
‭ROUTES Initiative. “EV Infrastructure Project Planning Checklist | US Department of‬
‭Transportation.”‬‭Www.transportation.gov‬‭, 5 May 2023,‬
‭www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit/ev-infrastructure-planning/project-plannin‬
‭g-checklist. Accessed 28 Jan. 2024.‬
‭Statista. “EMobility : In-Depth Market Analysis.”‬‭Statista‬‭, June 2022,‬
‭www.statista.com/study/49240/emobility---market-insights-and-data-analysis/.‬
‭Accessed 28 Jan. 2024.‬

‭24‬