Electric Vehicle Public Charging Infrastructure Planning Using Real-World Charging Data
, Christopher Hecht 1,2,*,†, Rafael Goldbeck 2,*,†, Dirk Uwe Sauer 1,2,3,4 and Rik W. De Doncker 1,2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please find the attachment.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for the helpful review. In the appendix, you can find our answers to your questions. If we have changed something in the paper as a consequence, this is also indicated.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This article is very interesting even for people who don§t accept electric mobility as a new religion. Conenctin with POI sounds really smart. maybe I have only remarks to used methods:
- it is based on circles around charging stations but in the cities it is very untrustworthy parameter due to eg intricate one-way roads in the middle of high-traffic cities
- and changing different altitude POIs in cities and beyond
is it possible to accept these as parameter of calculations ? POI is fine but when energy is missing due big hill with shop centre, it is frustrating.
So my question is if you can take into account that city or village is not a plane.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for the helpful review. In the appendix, you can find our answers to your questions. If we have changed something in the paper as a consequence, this is also indicated.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
I would like to congratulate and thank the authors to present such complete and balanced work on charging infrastructure planning and policy recommendation. It is vary good work and provides candid discussions on the limitations of this study. A few comments are given for the authors' reference.
- Grammar error on Line 354, Page 14.
- If possible, please provide more discussions on how to determine the shape of the polygons such as triangle, pentagon, etc. Besides, please explain how to determine the area that each polygon represents. These may have significant influence on the outcome.
- As claimed, the occupation time is used to measure the usage of CPs, which may introduce errors due to no charging issues. The authors may conduct a in-site survey to get a more precise charging-to-occupation ratio. This would make your study more realistic.
- Please carefully discuss how to determine some key parameters, e.g., r=500 m. This may vary in different regions throughout Germany.
- As indicated in this study, the average charging hours per day for CPs is relatively low. It is meaningful to discuss what much time is needed for CPs is required to support sustainable commercial operation. Of course, it may also differ among different regions and types of areas, rural or urban.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for the helpful review. In the appendix, you can find our answers to your questions. If we have changed something in the paper as a consequence, this is also indicated.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The presented article is interesting and trendy. Authors have proposed a charging station placement based on real-world data on charging station utilization and places of common interest, however the the necessity of this approach is yet to define in detail in the introduction compare to some of the existing approaches. How feasible to implement this approach in a real time scenario. It is suggested to add some quantitative metrics in the abstract.
- Suggested to add structure of the article and main contributions and novelty of work in the end of introduction.
- Provide sources of collecting data.
- Do we have any methods other regression, if so, why cant we proceed with such methods.
- The presented results are limited and it is suggested to incorporate bar charts in terms of cost analysis.
- So many limitations have been presented in section 6, However it is suggested to provide future direction and solutions to overcome those limitations.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for the helpful review. In the appendix, you can find our answers to your questions. If we have changed something in the paper as a consequence, this is also indicated.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The reviewer insists that the cost and business models of recycling second-life EV batteries and the higher cost of bi-directional chargers for V2G should be partially included in this work (previous point 4). Thanks.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We have prepared a rebuttal to your mentioned point. We hope to have explained our point of view comprehensibly and thank you again for the valuable review from the first round.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
