2.

Review

Beyond the State of the Art of

Electric Vehicles: A Fact-Based
Paper of the Current and
Prospective Electric Vehicle
Technologies

Joeri Van Mierlo, Maitane Berecibar, Mohamed El Baghdadi , Cedric De Cauwer , Maarten Messagie,
Thierry Coosemans, Valéry Ann Jacobs and Omar Hegazy

Special Issue
Feature Papers in World Electric Vehicle Journal in 2021
Edited by
Prof. Dr. Joeri Van Mierlo

https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj12010020
Review
Beyond the State of the Art of Electric Vehicles: A Fact-Based
Paper of the Current and Prospective Electric
Vehicle Technologies
Joeri Van Mierlo 1,2, * , Maitane Berecibar 1,2 , Mohamed El Baghdadi 1,2 , Cedric De Cauwer 1,2 ,
Maarten Messagie 1,2 , Thierry Coosemans 1,2 , Valéry Ann Jacobs 1 and Omar Hegazy 1,2

1 Mobility, Logistics and Automotive Technology Research Centre (MOBI), Department of Electrical
Engineering and Energy Technology (ETEC), Faculty of Engineering, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB),
1050 Brussel, Belgium; [email protected] (M.B.); [email protected] (M.E.B.);
[email protected] (C.D.C.); [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (T.C.);
[email protected] (V.A.J.); [email protected] (O.H.)
2 Flanders Make, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Today, there are many recent developments that focus on improving the electric vehicles
and their components, particularly regarding advances in batteries, energy management systems,
autonomous features and charging infrastructure. This plays an important role in developing next
electric vehicle generations, and encourages more efficient and sustainable eco-system. This paper
not only provides insights in the latest knowledge and developments of electric vehicles (EVs), but
also the new promising and novel EV technologies based on scientific facts and figures—which could





 be from a technological point of view feasible by 2030. In this paper, potential design and modelling
tools, such as digital twin with connected Internet-of-Things (IoT), are addressed. Furthermore,
Citation: Van Mierlo, J.; Berecibar,
M.; El Baghdadi, M.; De Cauwer, C.;
the potential technological challenges and research gaps in all EV aspects from hard-core battery
Messagie, M.; Coosemans, T.; Jacobs, material sciences, power electronics and powertrain engineering up to environmental assessments
V.A.; Hegazy, O. Beyond the State of and market considerations are addressed. The paper is based on the knowledge of the 140+ FTE
the Art of Electric Vehicles: A counting multidisciplinary research centre MOBI-VUB, that has a 40-year track record in the field of
Fact-Based Paper of the Current and electric vehicles and e-mobility.
Prospective Electric Vehicle
Technologies. World Electr. Veh. J. Keywords: electric vehicle; digital twin; wide bandgap semiconductors; power converters; solid-state
2021, 12, 20. https://doi.org/ batteries; ultra-high fast chargers; vehicle-to-grid (V2G); vehicle-to-X (V2X); sustainable energy com-
10.3390/wevj12010020 munities; renewable energy sources; autonomous electric vehicles; optical wireless communications

Received: 30 November 2020

Accepted: 29 January 2021
Published: 3 February 2021
1. Introduction
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
Within the current electric vehicle (EV) evolution and electrification strategy towards
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
more and more green and sustainable transport, there are key technological barriers and
published maps and institutional affil- challenges, which are frequently changing from stakeholders’ perspectives [1]. A decade
iations. ago, surveys [2] have pointed out that the three main barriers for the market introduction
of electric vehicles (EV) were purchase price, driving range and availability of charging
infrastructure. However, these key barriers have changed drastically. The cost of the
battery—the most expensive component of the EV propulsion system—has dropped down
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
nearly 90% [3,4]. Purchase price parity is expected by 2025 at the latest. From then onwards
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
electric vehicles will be cheaper to buy compared to conventional vehicles. Knowing that
This article is an open access article
the running cost and maintenance cost are already cheaper today, this means that the total
distributed under the terms and cost of ownership (TCO) will be cheaper in the coming years. The driving range increased
conditions of the Creative Commons from between 100–150 km up to 400+ km [5–7]. In most countries, the availability of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// charging infrastructure is still an issue, especially for people living in urban areas and who
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ often have no private parking place. EVs have proven to be better for the environment [8,9]
4.0/). and allow a higher penetration of renewable energy sources in the electricity grid [10].

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj12010020 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/wevj

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 2 of 26

Which developments have made it possible to reach such impressive improvements?

Was it only due to mass market production—upscaling the production capacity or also due
to technological improvements—or choices of materials and designs? And what is needed
for further improvements in driving range and cost reduction or grid integrations?
This paper will tackle these questions and more. This with a focus on innovative
technological developments [11–13].
The specific energy of the battery has been improved from 110 Wh/kg in 2010 to
250 Wh/kg in 2020. This can further be improved up to 450 Wh/kg by 2030. In the same
time the battery energy density will increase from 310 Wh/L in 2010 and 580 Wh/L today
up to 1100 Wh/L by 2030. The battery cost has reduced from 1000 €/kWh to 130 €/kWh
and is expected to further decrease below 80 €/kWh. How all this can be achieved is
explained in Section 3 about the battery technology. It is mainly based on finding suitable
electrolytes for high voltage cathodes. A higher specific energy will lead to an increased
driving range or a lower vehicle weight and this at a lower battery cost. The size of the
battery in 2010 was typically 30 kWh; today 60 kWh is not an exception anymore and by
2030 the battery capacity will be over 80kWh.
The traction inverter power density is improved from 10 kW/L in 2010 to 30 kW/L
in 2020 and can further be improved up to 65 kW/L in 2030 depending on the DC-link
voltage, which results in a volume reduction up to 40%. In the same time the peak inverter
efficiency has increased from 92% (2010) to 96% (2020) and can be further improved up to
98% by introducing the wide bandgap technology in the drive system. This will enhance
the driving range up to 8%. More info can be found in Section 2. A similar trend can be
observed for the battery charger and DC/DC converters, where efficiencies up to 99%
could be achieved by 2030, leading to a reduction of the charging cost by 20%. The progress
of charging infrastructure is explained in Section 4. Improved efficiencies will result in
a reduction in the vehicle energy consumption up to 32% (from 0,22 kWh/km down to
0.15 kWh/km).
The environmental impact of electric vehicles mainly depends on how electricity is
produced. Based on the EU energy mix the CO2 emissions were around 300 CO2 g/kWh
in 2010. It is expected, by an increased share of renewable energy sources and even
considering phasing out nuclear power plants, that by 2030 the CO2 emissions would
reduce below at least 200 CO2 g/kWh, as explained in Section 5. Considering the electric
vehicle consumption and emissions to produce the electricity, the CO2 emissions per vehicle
will decrease from 66 CO2 g/km in 2010 to below 30 CO2 g/km in 2030.
By 2030 autonomous vehicles (AV) are expected to come into play. Most likely they
will be electric and shared. While Level 1 automation (SAE) had already been introduced
in some commercial vehicles by 2010, current state-of-the art in commercial vehicles is at
level 3 for and at level 4 for specific pilot projects. With advances in artificial intelligence
and communication technology, the level of automation is expected to have evolved to
widespread level 4 automation by 2030, which will open the way to new and shared
mobility services. This progress is described in Section 6.
As such the paper is structured as follows: It starts from the overall vehicle propulsion
design based on a digital twin (DT) approach. Next, the advantages of the novel wide
bandgap (WBG) technology used as semiconductors in power converters are described.
Then, the battery technologies and their advances, as EV key component, mainly based
on solid-state batteries are tackled. Furthermore, the advances in ultra-high fast battery
chargers are elaborated. More and more these battery chargers will become bidirectional
systems allowing vehicle-to-grid (V2G) or V2X features (such as vehicle-to-home (V2H),
vehicle-to-building (V2B) and vehicle-to-device (V2D)). This will open a smart interac-
tion and management with the grid network towards Sustainable Energy Communities,
where renewable energy sources are seamlessly integrated with EVs. The way electricity
is produced defines the environmental performance of EVs. The last part of this paper
tackles the current developments in autonomous electric vehicles (AEVs), with a focus
on shared autonomous electric vehicles (SAEV) and its robust optical vehicle wireless
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 3 of 26

communications in vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), which

have an impact on the developed management strategies and their interactions with the
available charging infrastructure [14–16].

2. The Next Generation EV Propulsion Systems

EV propulsion systems are very simple from a concept point of view [17]: A battery,
power converter, an electric motor and a fixed transmission. No clutch, no gearbox, no oil
filters, etc. are needed. However, to reduce cost and improve driving range and driving
comfort, even more, novel approaches are required. They are often based on top-notch
simulation models [18–21]. This section gives insights into the next generation of the EV
systems and future trends and new directions.

2.1. Digital Twin Development for EVs and Its Associated Benefits
For many years, automotive researchers and engineers have prepared analytical
and simulation models of EV’s components and entire EVs, and over time, these models
have become increasingly sophisticated and accurate. With the advancement of sensors,
the Internet of Things (IoT) devices and network technologies, these offline physical
assets convert into the digital models, are enabling smart system monitoring, prediction
and re-scheduling of upcoming maintenance events, fault locations, fault endurance and
remaining useful lifetime. The future EVs can provide a cost and effort reduction in the
system design, verification, testing and time-to-market thanks to the EV digital twin. Five
technology trends are developing in a complementary way to enable digital twins, namely,
the IoT, cloud computing, APIs and open standards, artificial intelligence (AI) and digital
reality technologies [22,23].
Figure 1 depicts the digital twin concept containing the real space’s physical device,
which is a commercial EV drivetrain (e.g., battery, power electronics converters and motor)
with sensors and control units. The virtual space contains the representative model in the
simulation platform. It is a Multiphysics based high-fidelity model of the EV drivetrain.
The transfer of data and information connects the real space with the virtual space. This
reference model allows the vehicle designer to create a virtual process parallel to the
physical one—this virtual process offers a tool for both static and dynamic analysis of the
physical EV.

Figure 1. A concept development of digital twin implementation in MOBI-VUB.

The digital twin model/tool of the EV can offer several benefits:

• Ensuring a leap forward in user’s confidence, functionalities and energy efficiency
of future EVs: These characteristics can estimate vehicle characteristics and usability.
For example, affordability, driving range, range prediction, overall trip time and
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 4 of 26

especially suitability of a long-range trip and comfort under all ambient conditions
and traffic situations.
• Multi-Physics Modelling for stress analysis: This analysis can prevent failures by
predicting them in advance, which, in turn, will help to reduce the downtime.
• Mission-profile-based reliability analysis for predictive maintenance: From the
mission-profile-oriented accelerated lifetime testing, the degradation of the battery
electric vehicle (BEV) drivetrain can be identified of the components critical to system
reliability. Therefore, product developers will have more knowledge to be innova-
tive in a fast and reliable way, testing many numbers and combinations of different
variants of drivetrain components and experimenting with unorthodox approaches.
Furthermore, using the data gathered from the vehicles’ digital twin can develop
maintenance protocols/schedules to ensure that the components are available prior to
their estimated failure in the EV and minimise inventory stockpiles.
Furthermore, one of the key future trends is to use the DT in the powertrain design,
control design and reliability of advanced new powertrains. Thus, digital twin for design
(DT4D), digital twin for control design (DT4CD) and digital twin for reliability (DT4R) are
key new directions towards a more cost-effective and reliable future vehicle generations.

2.2. Power Electronics Interfaces Based on WBG Technologies

A key component in the EV propulsion systems is the power electronics converter [11].
The most important components of the power electronic converter (PEC) are the switches.
It is self-evident that a lot of research is going on to the semiconductor materials, which
are at the core of these switches. Nowadays, the switches inside the PECs are based on
silicon (Si) semiconductor technology. However, new insights in switching technology
have stimulated the development of wide bandgap (WBG) semiconductor materials, such
as silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride (GaN) [24–27].
The Si-based power electronics converters have a limitation in the switching frequency.
In particular, the Si-based IGBT traction inverter has limited switching frequency up to
20 kHz and has been used typically under 10 kHz [28] in real implementations according
to the user applications. Meanwhile, the Si-based on-board charger (OBC) has a restriction
on the switching frequency to be less than 100 kHz for MOSFET-based OBCs [29].
However, the WBG semiconductors provide interesting characteristics and advanced
material properties compared with traditional Si semiconductors, i.e., operating at higher
voltages and lower leakage current, higher electron mobility, electron saturation velocity,
higher switching frequency and higher thermal conductivity. The WBG materials require
energy larger than 1 eV or 2 eV to transfer an electron from the highest energy level of
the valence band to lowest energy level of the conduction band within the semiconduc-
tor [24–30]. A comparison of material properties between Si, SiC and GaN is shown in
Figure 2.
Furthermore, the WBG semiconductors have high switching frequency capabilities,
especially for low voltage applications enabling high efficiency and power density, as well
as a weight reduction for power electronics interfaces and improving the whole energy
efficiency of the electric powertrain.
However, there is a lack of technology maturity, design optimisation for fast devel-
opment and control algorithms for the GaN-based power electronics converters when
taking into account high switching frequencies (i.e., 40 kHz–100 kHz for inverter or active
front-end systems and 200 kHz–500 kHz for the OBC systems) and allowing the operation
at high temperature levels, as well as the expected cost. In addition, the multiphysics
modelling and thermal management of these emerging GaN semiconductor devices have
not been fully addressed in the literature. Thus, there is a strong need to develop such
design optimisation and accurate models for the GaN-based power electronics converters
with considering their parametric and non-parametric representations and to be used in
the future as a digital twin.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 5 of 26

Figure 2. Material properties comparison of silicon (Si), silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride
(GaN) edited from Reference [30].

Furthermore, in power electronic converters, semiconductor modules are the most

failure-prone devices, due to high thermal stress. Most common failures of intrinsic types
are time-dependent dielectric breakdown and electromigration [31].
Although technically the WBG-based power converter should be more reliable, due
to their higher activation of energy, practically due to continuous improvement of cost-
effective device packaging, the reliable operation of these compound semiconductors
is not fully addressed. There are some research papers– and industrial reports dealing
with the reliability analysis of–Si devices and recently, the SiC devices, whereas there are
a few reports on the GaN power devices. Moreover, the GaN-based inverter is also a
very new concept for the EV power electronics, but the voltage range is one of the key
challenges in the next years. For the predictive maintenance and reliability study, the
required stress-factor is also unavailable for the GaN technology, and there is a need for
further investigation and focus on this research part in the near future.
In line with these WBG technologies, integrating the WBG power electronics interfaces
either with electric motors or with the battery systems is one of the key future trends
towards more efficient and smart cooling systems and thermal management concepts in
vehicle powertrains.
More advantages of WBG technology are described in Section 4 about the charging
infrastructure.

3. The Next Generation Solid-State Battery

Lithium batteries are the dominant type of battery technology in EVs. There exist
many different types of lithium batteries with different characteristics [32–35]. The bat-
tery characteristics define their specific energy (hence, driving range), cycle life, power
performance, safety, etc. Novel battery chemistries, composition and production steps can
further improve vehicle’s driving range, environmental performance and cost [36].

3.1. Recent Lithium Battery Technology Developments

Li-ion batteries are often classified according to the cathode material used [37,38].
Among them, LCO (lithium cobalt oxide) is the most mature technology, with the highest
volumetric energy density, but low power density and service life. While this remains
the technology of choice for consumer electronics, much of the market is moving away
from this technology, due to its reliance on cobalt, a scarce resource commonly mined in
developing countries.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 6 of 26

On the other hand, LFP (lithium iron phosphate) batteries are made from the ubiq-
uitous iron and phosphate. They have a very long life and can deliver very high power
thanks to the rigid olivine structure of the material. Unfortunately, this technology is
less suitable for high energy applications, due to the inherent low potential vs Li+ and
specific capacitance. LFP remains a strong choice in power applications (hybrid vehicles,
power tools) or where many cycles are required (commercial electric vehicles, grid energy
storage).
Both NCA (lithium nickel cobalt aluminium oxide) and NMC (lithium nickel man-
ganese cobalt oxide) are technologies with a high energy density, which means that they are
commonly used in electric cars. A clear trend in both technologies is to reduce the amount
of cobalt in favour of the amount of nickel. This ensures a higher energy density and
reduces the dependence on the precious cobalt. NMC has been commercialised in different
types depending on the stoichiometric ratio of the elements. For example, NMC111, where
the three elements are each present in the same amount, NMC532 and NMC622. Given
the lower amount of nickel in favour of more manganese, NMC111 is more suitable for
higher power applications, while NCA, NMC-532 and NMC-622 can be considered as
state-of-the-art cathode materials (see Figure 3).

Figure 3. Energy density vs specific energy at electrode stack level for state-of-the-art and future cell
chemistries in automotive applications. The state-of-the-art Lithium battery chemistry is represented
by NMC-622/graphite and NCA (lithium nickel cobalt aluminium oxide)/graphite [37].

The commercially available material choices for the negative electrode are more
limited. Carbon-based anodes (amorphous carbon and graphite) have dominated since the
commercialisation of the Li-ion battery in 1991, due to their low potential vs Li + and good
specific capacitance. While graphite was found in 91% of commercial batteries in 2016,
only 7% used amorphous carbon and 2% LTO (lithium titanate oxide). Although the latter
charges the batteries extremely quickly for a large number of cycles, the raw materials are
very expensive, and they have a low energy density [39].
Thanks to the extensive research and development of Li-ion batteries in recent years,
we are gradually reaching the maximum potential of today’s electrode materials. To further
increase the energy density, a switch to new materials is inevitable (see Figure 3). Silicium
will play a crucial role in this in the near future. With a theoretical capacity that is nearly
10 times higher than graphite and a low cost, silicon is an excellent candidate for next-
generation anode materials [40]. Although the lifespan of pure silicon batteries is still very
limited, the element is already added to the graphite electrode in small quantities (e.g., 5%
in the Panasonic cells of the Tesla X). As technology advances, the percentage of silicon in
the anode will increase further over the next five years, while the amount of nickel in the
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 7 of 26

cathode will increase further. This will lead to a gradual increase in energy density. A major
leap in energy density is not expected until 2025, when post-Li-ion technologies, such as
lithium-sulphur, lithium-oxygen, lithium metal and solid-state batteries are expected [41].

3.2. Towards Solid-State Batteries

The next generation of Li-ion battery technology, set to enter the market in the coming
five to ten years, is likely to have low nickel and cobalt content. Near-term developments
should enable cell-level energy densities of up to 325 Wh/kg, and pack-level energy
densities could reach 275 Wh/kg [42].
To meet these targets, solid electrolytes are extensively studied. They are non-toxic
and not flammable. Accordingly, a significant improvement in safety could be observed.
The voltage losses, due to concentration polarisation, occurring in liquid electrolytes at
high power applications is eliminated in solid electrolytes allowing them to use thicker
electrolytes high energy density values. It’s also worth to mention that solid electrolytes
show outstanding resistance on dendrite propagation which enables using the advantages
of Li metal as an anode [43].
The solid electrolytes developed for EV applications require fast charging properties.
The highest current density above which the battery will be short-circuited, due to Lithium
dendrite penetration (known as critical current density) is one of the important param-
eters determining the fast-charging capabilities. State-of-the-art critical current density
values around 0.1 mA/cm2 is quite far away from the target value (5 mA/cm2 ) [44,45].
Besides, there is a difference between critical current densities during charging and dis-
charging. Today, critical current densities during charging are found to be higher than
during discharging [43].
To reach the high specific energy with an improved cycle life in solid-state batteries, it’s
crucial to assess the electrode-electrolyte interfaces. Electrochemical interfacial instability
is one leg of the cell failure. Even though, the solid-state electrolytes have currently a wide
electrochemical stability window up to 6 V (vs. Li+/Li) in which almost all of the battery
materials stay stable; the solid electrolyte-solid electrode contact could be lost at some point
resulting in an increase of the cell impedance. Some methodologies like liquid-solid hybrid
electrolytes were proposed for the purpose of clarifying the interface instabilities [46].
Based on their confirmed applications in the field of energy storage, polymer and
polymer composite electrolytes are becoming a focal point of solid-state batteries. They
exhibit reduced flammability compared to liquid electrolytes and outstanding mechanical
flexibility, processability and scaling-up. An ion conductive polymer, poly (ethylene oxide)
(PEO), and its derivatives are promising candidates for solid-state batteries in terms of
their ionic conductivity ranges. However, ion conduction is still poor and more complex
compared to the traditional organic liquid electrolytes [47,48].
Assembly of solid-state batteries is quite similar to the conventional Li-ion batteries
involving separate lines for anode, cathode and electrolyte sheets. However, the differ-
ence lies in the manufacturing of battery components and the assembly order. Unlike
traditional Li-ion batteries, electrolyte should be formed first, and electrodes should be
attached afterwards. Additionally, the synthesis of solid electrolytes requires relatively
high temperatures (above 1000 ◦ C in case of Li7La3Zr2O12) and generate highly toxic H2S
(in case of sulphides like Li6PS5Cl) [49].

3.3. Challenges and Potential Solutions for the Solid-State Battery

Energy and price targets for EV applications in both cell and pack level are quite
ambitious for short-term expectations. However, there is an extensive dedication to this
purpose even if the expected safety level is sacrificed. Some of the challenges that scientists
are currently trying to overcome are listed below:
1. Poor wetting between Li and solid electrolyte: The poor wetting between lithium and solid
electrolyte results in an interfacial resistance. Solid electrolytes, especially ceramic-
based solid electrolytes, have relatively high interfacial resistance caused by poor
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 8 of 26

wetting of Li. This inhibits the utilisation of Li in solid-state batteries. It was found
out that polymer-based solid electrolytes, despite their lower ionic conductivity when
compared to ceramic counterparts, shows enhanced Li wetting. Accordingly, Li wet-
ting problem can be solved by using polymer/ceramic composites as electrolytes [43].
2. Dendrite propagation and growth: When using Li metal, dendrite formation and prop-
agation become serious problems in high power applications. Critical current den-
sity values for solid-state batteries are quite far away from the target value of 5
mA/cm2 [44,45]. Besides, there is a difference between plating (charging) and strip-
ping (discharging), and the critical current density needs to be eliminated. The
mechanism and possible solutions for that are still unclear, but special attention
has been paid on producing the electrolytes as dense as possible, since the dendrite
propagation is drastically inhibited in dense microstructures [43].
3. Solid electrolyte synthesis: Solid electrolytes having high ionic conductivity is hard for
synthesising, storing and handling. They require sophisticated methods, oxygen-
free environments that make their use not cost-efficient. In this regard, there’s an
ongoing desire to reduce the production cost and ease the handleability of the solid
electrolytes.
4. Cell fabrication: Cell fabrication by using a ceramic type of electrolytes require hot
pressing techniques that apply high pressure and temperature at the same time to
ensure the smooth contact between electrolyte and electrodes (Figure 4). However,
that problem can be solved by design engineering. Bulk type solid-state batteries
can be assembled, and satisfying capacity retention could be gathered from these
batteries [50]. On the other hand, scalability is the most important challenge for
bulk-type battery designs. Polymers and polymer/ceramic composites are considered
as a potential solution for large scale manufacturing of solid-state batteries because of
their industrial-scale ease of production.

Figure 4. Battery fabrication for process parameter optimisation [51].

In addition to all these, Li metal creep at high operation temperatures can sometimes
occur. The up-to-date solution to prevent this is improving creep behaviour of lithium by
alloying [52].

3.4. Self-Healing Batteries with Embedded Sensors

Battery performance varies greatly over time. This can be attributed to several un-
wanted side reactions that occur at the material level, which ultimately induce capacity
fade and impedance growth which can lead to potential safety hazards in the form of
dendrite short circuits. As such, it is extremely important to monitor and control batteries
accurately during their operation. This is conventionally achieved by implementing a
Battery Management System (BMS). The BMS ensures that the voltage, current and temper-
ature of each cell stays within its optimal safety boundaries. Additionally, the BMS uses the
measurements on voltage, current and temperature to determine the battery states, such
as: State of charge, which shows how much energy is left in the battery [53], and the state
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 9 of 26

of health, which shows how much energy the battery can still hold compared to when it
was new [54]. These important battery states cannot be measured directly and must be
estimated using complex algorithms and battery models.
However, most of these activities rely on the use of sensors outside rather than
inside the battery cells, limiting the knowledge to macroscopic properties, but overlooking
internal chemical and physical parameters of prime importance for monitoring battery
lifetime. Because of this, implantable sensors which are integrated within the battery cell are
increasingly attracting interest. This will allow us to measure unexplored quantities, gain a
deeper knowledge of the physical parameters, and understanding the parasitic chemical
processes within the cells. This will drastically enhance battery reliability and safety.
Parameters, such as temperature, pressure, strain, expansion and electrolyte composition,
are among the valuable options [55]. Besides offering fundamental insights to battery
operation, smart sensors would also develop a next-generation of state estimators and
BMS.
Self-healing batteries is another new field of research. Battery degradation is the result
of unwanted chemical changes within the cell. The concept of self-healing in batteries is to
reverse these changes to restore the battery to its original configuration and functionality.
Specifically, self-healing functionalities in batteries will target:
• Auto-repair of damaged electrodes to restore their conductivity.
• Regulation of ion transport within the cell.
• Minimising the effect of parasitic side reactions.
The introduction of self-healing mechanisms to the field of battery technology has
been slow, due to the challenging chemical environment they must operate in, but the topic
is now rapidly gaining momentum.
Recently several self-healing concepts have been discussed in the literature, such as:
The self-healing polymer substrates which allow to repair damaged electrodes and restore
their conductivity [56]. Self-healing polymer binders, which prevent the loss of electrical
contact between cracked active material particles, for example, in silicon anodes [57]. An-
other promising concept is functionalised membranes which can trap unwanted molecules
and prevent them from reacting with other materials in the cell. Self-healing electrolytes,
on the other hand, contain healing agents which are capable of dissolving unwanted depo-
sitions [47]. Finally, a promising future concept is the encapsulated self-healing molecules.
These consist of healing agents contained in microcapsules. When needed, the healing
agents can be released by providing the right stimulus.
It should be noted that sensing and self-healing functionalities are intimately linked.
Smart batteries integrate both these functions: Signals from the integrated sensors will
be sent to the BMS and analysed. If problems are detected, the BMS will send a signal to
the actuator, triggering the stimulus of the appropriate self-healing process. This game-
changing approach will maximise reliability, lifetime, user confidence and safety of the
batteries of the future.

3.5. Second-Life: Challenges and Opportunities

A battery is considered at the end of its life when its state of health is below 80%.
Therefore, a battery at the end of its first life can still be used in another (or the same)
application to fit in the 4R-End of Life (EoL) management strategies: Reuse, Repair, Reman-
ufacture and Recycle. Today, the life of a battery looks like that: It is manufactured, used in
a vehicle, dismantled and partly recycled. However, it can be refurbished to be used in
stationary applications or in automotive applications.
In Europe, a study from the JRC showed that in 2025 between 0.6 GWh and 2.4 GWh
batteries could be available for second use [58]. Additionally, the global storage market is
more than 10 GWh today, according to the International Energy Agency.
However, to introduce second-life batteries in the market, there is a need to overcome
certain challenges. Evaluating the potential of a battery at the end of its first life raise
the needs for State of Health estimation techniques and the development of more further
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 10 of 26

lifetime predictive models [59]. There is also a need for safety protocols for the testing,
dismantling, remanufacturing and use of these batteries. Machine learning algorithms, for
instance can help to address these challenges [60]. Finally, the legal framework can also
be an obstacle. In the actual European battery waste directive from 2006, second-life is
not explicitly mentioned. However, the new version will define the legal framework for
second-life with the definition of waste battery and producer responsibility.

4. Intelligent Bidirectional V2G and/or Ultra-High-Power Charging Systems

4.1. Introduction to Unidirectional and Bidirectional Charging Systems
The fast and efficient charging of the EV battery is important for the large-scale
deployment of EVs. Today’s electric vehicle can travel 300–400 km without the need to
charge. There are many challenges to consider: One is the availability of charging stations
everywhere; second is fast charging; and another one is the enhancement of power density
and specific power [61].
Nowadays, four main types of charging exist. Following types of the charger are
explained in Table 1 [62].

Table 1. Type of chargers [62].

Type of Chargers Location of Charger Power Supply/Output Typical Charging Time

Vac: 230 (EU) 8–10 h depending on model,
Single phase Vac: 120 (US) used for home charging
Level 1
On-board Output: 12–16 A; ~1.44 kW to 3–8 km of range per hour of
~1.92 kW charging
Vac: 400 (EU) 4–8 h, available at home and
Single/three phase Vac: 240 (US) publicly
Level 2
On-board Output: 15–80 A; 16–32 km of range per hour of
~3.1 kW to ~19.2 kW charging
Uses a three-phase Vac: 208–600
AC circuit converted to direct 30–60 min
Level 3 Three-phase
current (DC) to the vehicle. 100–130 km of range per hour
DC Fast Chargers (DCFC) Off-board
Output: Up to 500 A; 50 kW up to of charging
350 kW
Uses a three-phase Vac: 208–600
Next Generation:
Three-phase AC circuit converted to direct Time to charge to a 320 km
Ultra-Fast Charging System
Off-board current (DC) to the vehicle. range: approximately 7.5 min
(UFCS)
Output: 800 V, 400 kW or more

The level-1 and level-2 chargers are used as on-board converters to charge the batteries.
Level-3 chargers typically work as an external converter and can effectively manage the
flow of high power. Mostly, slow charging takes place overnight, and it is associated to the
level-1 and level-2 charging. The level-1 and 2 are a basic method of charging, typically
situated at home, public and private facilities. A level-3 high power DC fast charger is
often located at commercial places like hotels, shopping malls and in the parking areas,
etc. [61,62].
The typical level-2 charger provides up to 22 kW AC charging, and charges the battery
in 120 min and delivers energy for travelling 200 km. The charging time will be reduced
to 16 min for 200 km by 150 kW DC charging stations. At 350 kW charging station, the
charging time would be close to the time of gas refuelling: around 7 min [63,64]. However,
it should be noted that the charging time also relies on the battery of the vehicle.
The three-phase front-end converter topology includes a diode rectifier, an active
buck/boost rectifier, a matrix rectifier or a Vienna rectifier [65]. The simplest and cost-
effective approach for power conversion is a diode rectifier. However, the output fixed
voltage is dependent on the three-phase supply voltage. The disadvantage of this approach
is the unfavourable total harmonic distortion (THD). A three-phase active front-end (AFE)
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 11 of 26

rectifier tackles the issue of THD by generating three-phase sine shaped input current
waveforms with improved power factor and efficiency and offering variable DC output
voltage. A Vienna rectifier is increasingly popular; possibly it is less well established.
Among all mentioned three-phase conversion techniques, the AFE boost rectifier can be
used for off-board fast-charging systems [63,66].
Grid-connected power electronic converters (PEC) are more widespread than ever,
due to the rise of battery electric vehicles. If these PECs are bidirectional, the power stored
in a vehicle can be used to supply peak power (vehicle-to-grid, V2G), or as temporary
storage for excess electricity (grid-to-vehicle, G2V). To accommodate the bidirectional flow
of power, existing PEC topologies have been re-adapted to use active switches instead of
diodes.
The system architecture of a multiphases-bidirectional on-board charger is illustrated
in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Multiphases-bidirectional on-board charger (OBC) system architecture [67].

4.2. Wide Bandgap Devices for Bidirectional (V2G/G2V) On-Board Charging Systems
It is essential to consider several elements in developing the PEC for the off-board
charger, i.e., high efficiency, high power factor, cost-effectiveness, smaller system size and
weight, distortion-free operation with limited grid impact and high reliability.
To meet the demand for a lightweight, compact and efficient OBC, wide bandgap
(WBG) devices will be also for the charger a promising technology. The GaN power
transistors, which have extremely low-gate charge and output capacitance, can be switched
at high frequency. This allows minimising the size and weight of passive components, such
as inductors, capacitors and transformers [67,68]. To explore further potentials of using
GaN power transistors in OBCs, semiconductor manufacturers recently have introduced
many new GaN high-electron-mobility transistor (GaN-HEMT) devices with a high voltage
rating of 600 V or 650 V and current rating from 20 A to 60 A [64,67]. These GaN-HEMT
devices could be suitable for OBCs with power levels from 3.3 kW to 22 kW.
Figure 6 shows two single-phase bidirectional OBC structures, which adopt the same
totem pole PFC for the AC-DC stage and different topologies in the DC-DC stage. As shown
in Figure 6a, Dual Active Bridge is a promising topology thanks to galvanic isolation and
bidirectional power conversion with zero voltage switching (ZVS) for both primary and
secondary sides, the small size of passive components and fixed-frequency operation [69].
However, the full range of ZVS becomes hard to achieve, due to the wide range of the load
power. The resonant bidirectional CLLC topology (C is capacitance and L is inductance),
as shown in Figure 6b, exhibits high efficiency, due to the ZVS in the primary bridge and
zero current switching (ZCS) in the secondary side. The drawback of CLLC topology in
the charging application is that the switching frequency needs to deviate from the series
resonant frequency for output voltage regulation. To overcome this issue, regulating the
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 12 of 26

DC bus voltage in the PFC stage instead of frequency modulation in the DC-DC stage
is proposed in Reference [70] so that the resonant CLLC stage can operate at its optimal
efficiency point [69,70].

(a)

(b)
Figure 6. Single phase bidirectional OBC system topologies based on GaN switches. (a) Dual active
full bridge (DAFB) converter, (b) CLLC resonant converter [67].

4.3. Ultra-High Power Off-Board Charging System

For design and development of ultra-fast charging systems, a modular converter
approach is an appropriate solution. Hence, the current topology, which is proposed for
the 600 kW DC ultra-fast charger, is realised by merging four AFE converters with each
other in a parallel configuration, as shown in Figure 7 [71].

Figure 7. 600 kW modular DC ultra-fast charger [71].

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 13 of 26

A comparative analysis has been performed between silicon and silicon carbide-based
semiconductors for each module at a power rating of 150 kW. The efficiency comparison
between Si (SKM400GB12T4) and SiC (CAS300M12BM2) devices, is based on a non-linear
electro-thermal simulation model at different power levels. For both cases, the related
datasheet data are inserted in simulation. Figure 8 shows how much the SiC devices are
more efficient than silicon for a charger. This means that the loss in Si is higher than SiC,
hence energy can be saved by using wide bandgap devices.

SiC Si

99.0

98.5

98.0

97.5
EFFICIENCY (%)

97.0

96.5

96.0

95.5

95.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
POWER (KW)

Figure 8. Efficiency map of Si- and SiC-based high power off-board charging system.

4.4. Intelligent Bidirectional Control Systems

PECs with bidirectional capabilities enable the use of advanced V2G and G2V control
strategies. Using a PQ theory-based control, the system can guarantee a unity power factor
while charging the EV battery, and an accurate reactive power reference tracking in V2G
mode [72].
Using parallel power converter modules is a low-cost option to improve the overall
versatility, efficiency, reliability and grid impact of the system [73,74]. However, it will
result in more complex control architectures.

4.4.1. Centralised Control Systems for Modular PEC

The simplest way to control the parallel converters is to use a single controller. Figure 9
demonstrates the centralised control system for modular Active Front-End rectifiers [71].
However, this mode of control can also be used for other bidirectional parallel converters
employed in the V2G/G2V systems, such as DC-DC converters, single phase power
factor correction rectifiers, etc. In this setup, the controller is connected to all sensors and
generates all gate signals. The advantages of such a system are the simple implementation
of current sharing, the interleaving, the minimum additional sensors and the absence of
synchronisation issues. The disadvantage of such a system is that it has a single point of
failure—the central controller and shared sensors.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 14 of 26

3-Phase
#1
#1 3-Phase
3-Phase
voltage
3-Phase
current
Filter
Filter AFE Vdc+
Vdc+
voltage current AFE
sensor sensor
sensor sensor
Vabc Iabc
Vabc Iabc
Vdc
Vdc
Va Cf
Cf
Va Gate drivers
Gate drivers
Vb
Vb
Vc
Vc #2
#2 3-Phase
3-Phase Filter
current Filter AFE
current
sensor
AFE Vdc-
Vdc-
sensor
Iabc
Iabc

Gate drivers
Gate drivers

#3
#3 3-Phase
3-Phase Filter
V * current Filter AFE
AFE
Vdc
dc* current
sensor
sensor
Iabc
Iabc

Centralized
Centralized Controller
Controller Gate drivers
Gate drivers

Legend:
Legend:
Measurements
Measurements Input/Output
Input/Output control
control signals
signals

Figure 9. Centralised control of modular power electronic converter (PEC) edited from Reference [71].

4.4.2. Distributed Control Systems for Modular PEC

An alternative to a centralised control system is a distributed control system, where
each power module has a separate control module. One example of a parallel PEC system
with the distributed control system is shown in Figure 10 [71]. Based on the relationship
of these control units between each other, there are several types of distributed control
systems that will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

#1
#1
3-Phase 3-Phase Idc
3-Phase 3-Phase Filter
voltage current Filter AFE Idc
voltage
sensor current AFE
sensor sensor Vdc
sensor Vdc
Cf
eabc Iabc Cf
eabc Iabc

Va
Va Gate drivers
Vb Gate drivers
Vb
Vc
Vc Control
Control system
system

#2
#2
3-Phase 3-Phase Idc
3-Phase 3-Phase Filter
voltage current Filter AFE Idc
voltage
sensor current AFE
sensor sensor Vdc
sensor Vdc
Cf
eabc Iabc Cf
eabc Iabc

Gate drivers
Gate drivers

Control
Control system
system Vdc*
Vdc*
#3
#3
3-Phase
3-Phase 3-Phase
3-Phase Filter
Idc Vdc+
Vdc+
voltage current Filter AFE Idc
voltage
sensor current AFE
sensor sensor Vdc
sensor Vdc
Cf
Cf
eabc
eabc
Iabc
Iabc Vdc-
Vdc-
Gate drivers
Gate drivers

Control
Control system
system

Legend:
Legend:
Measurements Input/Output control signals CAN Data exchange
Measurements Input/Output control signals CAN Data exchange

Figure 10. Distributed control of modular PEC edited from Reference [71].
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 15 of 26

(A) Master-Slave Control Systems for Modular PEC

The first distributed control strategy to consider for modular PEC is a master-slave
control, where the outer loop is implemented in the master controller, and the output of
this loop is shared with slave modules via a data bus. This system also has a single point of
failure—the master module, hence “auto master-slave” systems have been introduced: In
the case of the master module’s failure, one of the slaves can take its place [75,76]. Another
challenge of master-slave systems, both conventional and “auto”, is stability. An article
from 2016 [77] demonstrates how delays in the CAN bus can affect the stability of the
system with master-slave control. Moreover, the delay induced by the data bus increases
with the number of parallel modules [78].
(B) Masterless Control Systems for Modular PEC
Another distributed control system to be considered for parallel modular PEC is the
masterless control technique, which was described in Reference [79] for the control of
parallel DC-DC converters. In this system, all modules are equal, they exchange data
through CAN bus, but they use their own current reference for the inner current loop,
and therefore, expected to be more resistant to instabilities imposed by the data bus delay.
In this setup, each module has its own controller and sensors. Each controller can act
standalone, or work as a part of a system. The advantages of such a system are increased
scalability, reliability and stability. Moreover, masterless control introduces a number of
additional functions, such as: Dynamic resource allocation, automatic interleaving and
measurement error compensation.

5. The road to Climate Neutral Transport and Energy Sector

5.1. Sustainable Energy Communities
The bidirectional chargers described in the previous section will play a crucial role
in integrating renewable energy sources, such as wind, sun and hydro, into sustainable
energy communities. Renewable energy sources are seen as reliable alternatives to the
traditional energy sources, such as oil, natural gas, or coal [80], and have a much lower
impact on climate change from a life cycle perspective even when considering hourly
consequences of intermittency of renewables in a full dynamic energy system [81]. Due to
the increasing number of distributed power generation systems connected to the utility
network, challenges are raised concerning the power quality, safe running and islanding
protection. As a consequence, the control of distributed generation systems should be
improved to meet the requirements for grid interconnection [80].
If the whole vehicle fleet becomes electric, this would only mean an additional demand
for electricity of 20% (example of Belgium) [82]. The introduction of renewable energy
sources is gearing up. But what if there is no wind and sun? At these moments, we either
need to rely on other sources, or we need to invest more in energy storage. The battery
of an electric vehicle can play an important role. When there is an excess of wind or
solar electricity, it can be stored in the batteries of cars. It is defined as smart charging
management. When the demand for electricity is high, the stored electricity can be given
back to the grid. This is what has been called V2G or ‘vehicle-to-grid’. A thorough cycle test
of the battery ageing effects of using the V2H to power a house has shown limited impact.
This is mainly explained by the limited and optimising discharge current to power a house,
which is much lower compared to the current needed to accelerate a vehicle, resulting in
non-significant battery ageing effects of the V2G features [83].
Inside a Local Energy Community (LEC) there are different valuable ways to integrate
a battery:
• Batteries can be used for energy arbitrage: for economic benefits, energy is stored
when cheap in the wholesale market, and released when more expensive.
• Batteries can help in delaying or reducing investment needs in production, transmis-
sion or distribution infrastructure, this service is called capacity credit. This can be
done by load levelling or peak shaving for instance.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 16 of 26

• The fast response of batteries is necessary to provide high performance ancillary

services such as voltage and frequency regulation.
• Behind the meter, batteries can help in reducing electricity bill, increasing of PV
self-consumption in microgrids and backup power.
It is foreseen that the electricity grid will evolve towards more decentralised pro-
duction and the emergence of energy communities. Bidirectional charging systems of
the electric fleet are an essential element in the energy management of such systems and
can provide flexibility services, increase self-consumption and sustain in avoiding grid
congestion. A techno-economic assessment of a vehicle-to-grid case study can be found in
Reference [84].
However, to develop bidirectional functionalities, both vehicles and chargers must
be capable of variable and bidirectional power transmission and require intelligence and
communication with the local grid operator, features that require further research. First
insight shows that integrating electric vehicles smartly in a grid can help to capture the
grid balancing value streams [85].
Moreover, the user acceptance and business models regarding these functionalities
are largely unknown, untested and uncertain in the already heavily scrutinised market of
electric vehicles. Electric vehicles, as part of the solution for supply–demand balancing in
local energy systems with several energy vectors, need to be further tested and validated
in real-life circumstances. Forecasting of parking behaviour and mobility needs play an
essential role, and its development should be based on monitoring daily use of all kinds
of travellers. The deployment of a living lab where such experiments can be are carried
out is, hence, of primordial importance. Different concepts and specific requirements on
integrating the V2G in a local energy system are described in Reference [86].
A possible solution and opportunity are to change the traditional energy system
into Local Energy systems (LES) managed by a Local Energy Community (LEC). The
challenge is to correctly energetically balance and financially optimise such a complex
system with multiple connected, decentral devices that need to be controlled to guarantee
the overall quality and safety. Total system optimisation is achievable only if various
other types of energy vectors (electric, thermal, HVAC, mobility, data, etc.) are managed
together from a macro perspective. At the VUB, in close collaboration with the Green
Energy Park, a 20 MW living lab is being set up for industrial collaboration (more info:
www.greenenergypark.be (accessed on 3 February 2021)). In this living lab, the VUB deeply
researches the management, control and exploitation of a CO2 -neutral, self-sufficient
multi-energy microgrid. A first, promising calculation of minimising the levelised cost of
energy of the microgrid living lab can be found in Reference [87]. This paper [87] makes
a techno-economic assessment of the energy management that will be part of the living
lab microgrid placed in Zellik, Belgium. A levelised cost of energy (LCOE) calculation
approach is proposed that incorporates a hybrid energy generation plant composed of
solar and energy generation and a lithium-ion battery. The LCOE evaluated nine battery
operation scenarios to determine the most profitable battery operation criterion.
The living lab interconnects various prosumers: A large datacentre, an incubator for
start-ups, a large parking lot (150–400 vehicles) with electric charging infrastructure and
70 companies from different sectors. In addition, the CO2 -neutral microgrid will integrate
renewable energy production systems (3–4 MW solar, 3–4 MW Wind Energy), cogeneration
(or Combined Heat Power CHP) and energy storage capacity.

5.2. Current Impact on Climate Change

The above-mentioned increase in renewable energy sources will have an impact on
the EV’s impact on the environment. In a full life cycle, electric vehicles emit two times less
carbon dioxide (CO2 ) than petrol or diesel engines if we take the European electricity mix.
This can be even four times less if we take, for example, the Belgian electricity mix. If cars
were driving on renewable electricity, carbon dioxide emissions could be further reduced
by more than 10 times [8,82,88].
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 17 of 26

Figure 11 shows the results for climate change or global warming potential for all the
compared vehicles. Overall, the BEV charged with the Belgian electricity mix has the lowest
climate change score. This is because, first, there are no tailpipe emissions, and secondly,
the Well-to-Tank (WTT) emissions of Belgian electricity mix does not have a big impact
on climate change. In the WTT part of the BEV, the emissions come mainly from the gas
power plants. In general, all the electric vehicles, have lower emissions than other vehicle
technologies. FCEV (fuel cell electric vehicle) has the highest score among the alternative
drivetrains. This is mainly because of the huge emissions in the WTT part of hydrogen
production from steam methane reforming. However, it must be noted that the WTT
emissions of FCEV might vary significantly if other hydrogen production methods, e.g.,
electrolysis, were chosen. Also, the plug-in EVs (PHEV) can be fuelled by a wide variety of
primary energy sources—including gas, coal, oil, biomass, wind, solar and nuclear—wich
can reduce oil dependency and enhancing energy security.
In general, the vehicle cycle phase of EVs has a higher climate change impact than the
fossil fuel vehicles, mainly because of the production of EV specific extra components. It is
apparent that the unconventional fossil fuels, i.e., shale gas and shale petrol, are not very
interesting for climate change mitigation, compared to their conventional counterparts.

Figure 11. Climate change life cycle assessment (LCA) results [8].

In addition, the BEV has a better performance in many other mid-point categories,
compared to the conventional petrol and diesel vehicles, except in the human toxicity cate-
gory. The high impact on human toxicity is mainly because of the large contribution from
the manufacturing of extra components like battery, motor, electronics, etc. Nonetheless,
comparing the well-to-wheel (WTW) phase, which is appropriate for the Belgian boundary
(and urban context), reveals that the BEV has better scores among all the vehicles in the
analysed impact categories. This is true also for all the end-point damage assessment
categories: Damage to human health, damage to eco-system and resource depletion. Even,
when all the impact categories are weighted and expressed as single score, the average
BEV and PHEV have the lowest environmental impact in the current Belgian system.
Uncertainty is an inevitable element of LCA, which is normally left out in vehicle
LCA studies. Comparing one (or average) vehicle from each technology does not give a
clear picture of a complex market of vehicles with huge variability in terms of weight, fuel
consumption, emissions, etc. Therefore, a range-based LCA approach that embraces the
market variability of each technology is presented in References [8,89]. The results show
that the BEV exhibits the best performance when the comparison is on the all-inclusive
single score level, as illustrated in Figure 12.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 18 of 26

Figure 12. Single score LCA results [8].

6. Autonomous Electric Vehicles (AEV)

Alongside the electrification of both the transport and energy sector, these sectors
are also in the transition towards further automation. The emerging research efforts
and investments from both the automotive industry and other technology companies
for the development of electric vehicles with high levels of automation demonstrate the
emergence of this technology. Further automation of the EV is, therefore, a logical future
perspective that can bring additional benefits in the form of service level, cost reduction,
safety and environmental benefits, especially in combination with disruptive mobility
solutions, such as car-sharing and ride-sharing solutions [90,91]. This transition from
EV to AEV needs new developments in some key enabling technologies, such as robust
sensor technology, artificial intelligence, data-driven algorithms, smart communication
and presents opportunities to exploit synergies between the AV and EV. This could further
optimise the mobility system, and their integration into the electricity system, and it
could reduce their environmental impact [92] by addressing the challenges of the fleet
management and energy demand. To achieve a seamless integration into the electricity
system with the existing charging infrastructure and high safety with other vehicles, robust
and fast communication protocols are needed.

6.1. Wireless Communication as a Key Enabling Technology

To promote road safety, vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I)
communication are essential elements when evolving towards higher levels of autonomous
vehicles. When V2V and V2I systems are combined, a completely connected system is
obtained, namely, the V2X system. As shown in Figure 13, for a true V2X system, also
vehicle-to-pedestrian (V2P), vehicle-to-network (V2N), vehicle-to-cloud (V2C) and vehicle-
to-home (V2H) should be considered.

Figure 13. Vehicle-to-everything protocol.

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 19 of 26

There exist multiple means to establish this communication, each with its own ad-
vantages and drawbacks. Well-known technologies for wireless communication are 5G,
Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. Although in some cases, these radio wave technologies might provide
enough bandwidth for V2V and V2I communication, it is essential to consider situations
where this is not possible. Examples are the countryside, badly covered regions in cities,
regions with a lot of electromagnetic interference, indoor and subterranean areas, such
as parking lots and tunnels, etc. An alternative to radio wave communication is Light
Fidelity (Li-Fi), which uses visible and infrared light for data traffic. The term Li-Fi was first
introduced to the wide public by Professor Harald Haas, in 2011 [93]. He demonstrated
how data can be transmitted towards a photoreceiver by using light from a simple LED
(light-emitting diode) desk lamp. This can be done by modulating the light radiation
from existing lighting infrastructure, e.g., streetlight, car headlights, etc. With the use of
suitable photoreceivers, either a unidirectional or bidirectional communication link can be
established with a bandwidth that can yield up to a data rate 100 times larger compared to
Wi-Fi [93].
The technical implementation of Li-Fi is displayed in Figure 14. The intensity of the
light emitted by the transmitter of solid-state light-sources, such as a LED or a Laser Diode
(LD), is modulated by an electrical driver by turning the current on and off. This type of
modulation is called intensity modulation (IM). The maximum frequency of the human
visual system can observe, lies between 30 Hz and 60 Hz. The flickering caused by the
IM ranges from hundreds of MHz up to 1 GHz, depending on the RC properties of the
source and by consequence, it is thus impossible for a human observer to perceive any
flickering. The driver is powered and connected to either the world wide web or a local
server through well-known technologies, such as power-line-communication (PLC) or
Power-over-Ethernet (PoE). At the receiver side, a photodiode or photoreceiver turns the
light signal back into an electrical signal, ready for processing. The received signal must be
processed by a processing unit to fetch the data residing in it.

Figure 14. The technical implementation of a Li-Fi downlink channel. A similar approach can be adopted for uplink
communication, although the points mentioned in the previous section should be considered.

With the increasing use of solid-state lighting, both in cars (head- and taillights), as
well as in the infrastructure (road lighting and traffic lights), implementing Li-Fi is relatively
easy. Relatively, as for comparable systems using classic RF-based communication (like
dedicated short-range communications or DSRC), a whole new infrastructure needs to
be built. A Li-Fi transmitter can be as simple as a LED light, meaning that the existing
lighting infrastructure could be used as Li-Fi transmitters. It can then be used as an access
point for information for both vehicles and other road users (pedestrians, bikes, etc.).
The implementation cost is thus limited, and the available access points are abundant.
The current “dumb” road lighting has the potential to evolve towards a “smart” lighting
infrastructure with limited efforts. Nevertheless, the technical implementation of Li-Fi
remains a challenge, as has been explained earlier. But the implementation costs are lower
compared to alternatives.
A potential application and new trend of the Li-Fi in V2X is the communication of
critical traffic data in-between vehicles, as well as from vehicle to infrastructure or vice-
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 20 of 26

versa. Vehicles or their drivers will be able to respond much faster, which increases the
overall safety. Also, the level of traffic monitoring can be improved, which leads to better
traffic regulation and traffic flow, and this will impact the energy demand. Moreover, the Li-
Fi provides fast internet connection and consequently enables the transfer of not only traffic
data, but any kind of data. Adopting multisensorial input and various communication
channels, i.e., the Li-Fi together with other wireless communication technologies, such
as 5G and Wi-Fi, will result in more reliable autonomous and connected vehicles, thus
improving the road safety.

6.2. Shared Autonomous Electric Vehicles (SAEV)

Shared autonomous vehicles (SAV) are gaining general interest, due to the fact that
they could be a cheaper, safer and more efficient versions of today’s ride-sourcing and
car-sharing options [91]. Moreover, the electric version, SAEVs, could compete economi-
cally with current mobility solutions and further reduce environmental impact compared
to conventional combustion engine vehicles. They are, therefore, viewed as a promis-
ing component of smart mobility [92]. The deployment of SAEVs presents numerous
challenges. From an economic point of view, to create viable business models, it will be
crucial to estimate passenger demand and determine the willingness to use and to pay
for this service [92]. From the mobility viewpoint, vehicle supply will need to match the
travel demand. SAEVs could improve mobility, especially for the elderly and people with
reduced mobility [94–96]. However, a concern in this regard is the digital divide between
people where socially disadvantaged people are less tech-savvy and reluctant to accept
new technologies. Fleet management must ensure service to passengers, while the electric
nature of the AEVs requires taking the driving range and vehicle charging into account. For
the SAEVs fleet charging, the anticipated volume, location and power levels of the charging
stations are important [91]. Studies on SAEV that include the charging aspects [91,97,98]
have so far only included a spatial distribution or rule-based introduction, yet do not look
at other attributes to assess the suitability of a location, nor do they check grid constraints
or impacts which, thus, remains an ongoing research topic. Additionally, from an energy
point of view, the mass introduction of electric vehicles raises concerns with regards to
electricity supply and electricity grid. However, research has demonstrated that large scale
introduction of EVs only moderately increases electricity demand and presents a great
opportunity to balance the electricity grid through various ancillary services with smart-
or bidirectional charging (vehicle-to-grid) [99] and can facilitate further deployment of
renewable energy sources (RES) by balancing their intermittent nature [100], as explained
in the previous chapter. The SAEV fleets have a high degree of controllability and coor-
dination and present an opportunity in this regard. This integration of the SAEV system
in the electricity grid is, therefore, an essential development. It was found by modelling
some alternative scenarios that SAEV fleets are likely to electrify quickly, and therefore,
contribute to reducing CO2 emissions in combination with the further decarbonisation of
electricity generation and that the ability to optimally schedule SAEV charging is a more
important determinant of positive environmental and economic outcomes than the travel
demand effects of SAEV fleets [101].
Studies, thus, currently indicate the potential of SAEV fleets inherent to both their
autonomous and electric nature that make way for optimised behaviour (environmental,
economic, service) of the fleet. It does, however, present a challenging fleet manage-
ment problem dealing with mobility and energy demand which requires further research
alongside the technological advancement of key enabling technologies.

7. Conclusions
This paper provides an overview of the current state of the art in electric vehicle devel-
opments and innovation, related to the vehicle components, their charging infrastructure
and interaction with the grid, but also related to battery material sciences and power elec-
tronics engineering up to environmental assessments, market considerations and synergies
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 21 of 26

with shared and autonomous vehicles. This paper also provides recommendations for
future developments and trends.
The EV purchase price and driving range have improved, due to the current optimisa-
tion in battery technologies and their system interfaces. This will be further improved by
making use of innovative solid-state batteries. Solid-state batteries have the potential to
reach higher energy density values. This promising novel technology together with the
development of self-healing batteries and the integration of embedded sensors in the cell,
will provide more durable and safer batteries. As such, the specific energy of the battery
can be improved from 110 Wh/kg in 2010 up to 450 Wh/kg by 2030. In the same time the
battery energy density can increase from 310 Wh/L in 2010 up to 1100 Wh/L by 2030. The
battery cost can be reduced from 1000 €/kWh to 80 €/kWh or less by 2030. This will lead
to an increased driving range or a lower vehicle weight and this at a lower battery cost.
The size of the battery in 2010 was typically 30 kWh and by 2030 the battery capacity could
be over 80kWh.
Digital twin (DT) will be an enabler tool for further optimisation of the efficiency and
reliability of EVs and offer powertrain design for high reliability. Thus, this will provide
new trends and directions—such as digital twin for design (DT4D), digital twin for control
design (DT4CD), digital twin for virtual validation (DT4VV) and digital twin for reliability
(DT4R)—for new and efficient and cost-effective powertrains.
Moreover, emerging wide bandgap (WBG) technologies in power electronics interfaces
and their integration concepts can provide a significant efficiency improvement not only
in the EV powertrains, but also in charging systems enabling high-performance V2X
systems. The latter will enable an intelligent utilisation of energy sources with smart energy
management strategies for efficient and seamless integration into grid networks. Ultrafast
and/or bidirectional chargers will allow better integration of renewable energy sources
into the grid, making the use of electric vehicles even cleaner as they are today. The traction
inverter’s power density can be improved from 10 kW/L in 2010 to up to 65 kW/L by
2030, which results in a volume reduction up to 40%. In the same time the peak inverter
efficiency has increased from 92% (2010) to up to 98% (2030) by making use of this wide
bandgap technology. This will enhance the driving range with 8%. A similar trend can be
observed for the battery charger, where efficiencies up to 99% could be achieved by 2030,
leading to a reduction of the charging cost by 20%. Improved efficiencies will result in a
decrease of vehicle energy consumption from 0.22 kWh/km down to 0.15 kWh/km (2030).
The environmental impact of electric vehicles mainly depends on how electricity is
produced. Based on the EU energy mix the CO2 emissions were around 300 g/kWh in
2010. It is expected by an increased share of renewable energy sources that by 2030 the
CO2 emissions would reduce below at least 200 g/kWh. Considering the electric vehicle
consumption and emissions to produce the electricity, the CO2 emissions per vehicle will
decrease from 66 g/km in 2010 to below 30g/km in 2030.
Introducing shared autonomous electric vehicles (SAEVs) as an alternative to pri-
vate car ownership will allow for further optimisation of the energy demand and grid
management in the light of the transition towards thorough electrification. The seamless
integration of electrified and automated fleets in the energy sector will also be a key enabler
realising sustainable energy communities, where increased levels of renewable energy are
locally produced and consumed. The level of automation (SAE) has shifted from level 0 to
1 in 2010, is currently evolving from level 2 to 3 and will attain up to 4 by 2030.
Finally, including the Li-Fi technology in the state-of-the-art wireless communication
systems will lead to more redundant, fast and low-cost data transfer. Since the demand
for mobile data is increasing much faster than the supply, it is indispensable to use novel
technologies, such as Li-Fi in as many ways as possible. This will increase road safety and
allow for better energy management of the AEV fleet.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 22 of 26

Author Contributions: J.V.M. took the initiative for this paper, wrote the introduction, and brought
everything together. O.H. and M.E.B. were in charge of the Sections 2 and 4 on propulsion systems
(digital twin), WBG power electronics and charging technology. M.B. drafted Section 3 on the battery
technology (Solid state, self healing and sensing). M.M. and T.C. wrote the Section 5 on sustainable
energy communities and LCA. Finally, C.D.C. and V.A.J. provided the input for shared autonomous
electric vehicles and LiFi technology of Section 6. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was partly funded by the European Commission projects: BAT4EVER (ID:
957225), SPARTACUS (ID: 957221), BATTERY2030PLUS (ID: 957213), RENewAble Integration and
SuStainAbility iN energy CommunitiEs; Renaissance (H2020 - ID nr 824342), HIFI Elements (ID
769935), OBELICS (ID 769506), HiPERFORM (ECSEL JU no. 783174) as well as funded by VLAIO,
projects: OPTIBIDS: Optimized bidirectional & Smart vehicle charging in local energy systems and
SBO ModulAr.
Acknowledgments: We acknowledge Flanders Make for the support to our research group. We also
acknowledge the European Commission for the support to the above-mentioned European projects
as well as Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship (VLAIO).
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
1. Chan, C.C.; Wong, Y.S.; Bouscayrol, A.; Chen, K. Powering Sustainable Mobility: Roadmaps of Electric, Hybrid, and Fuel Cell
Vehicles. Proc. IEEE 2009, 97, 603–607. [CrossRef]
2. Lebeau, K.; van Mierlo, J.; Lebeau, P.; Mairesse, O.; Macharis, C. Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: A
large-scale survey. Int. J. Electr. Hybrid Veh. 2013, 5, 28–41. [CrossRef]
3. BloombergNEF. BloombergNEF’s 2019 Battery Price Survey BNEF. Available online: https://about.bnef.com/blog/battery-pack-
prices-fall-as-market-ramps-up-with-market-average-at-156-kwh-in-2019/ (accessed on 3 February 2021).
4. Berckmans, G.; Messagie, M.; Smekens, J.; Omar, N.; Vanhaverbeke, L.; van Mierlo, J. Cost projection of state of the art lithium-ion
batteries for electric vehicles up to 2030. Energies 2017, 10, 1314. [CrossRef]
5. Vijayagopal, R.; Rousseau, A. Benefits of electrified powertrains in medium-and heavy-duty vehicles. World Electr. Veh. J. 2020,
11, 12. [CrossRef]
6. Simeu, S.K.; Brokate, J.; Stephens, T.; Rousseau, A. Factors influencing energy consumption and cost-competiveness of plug-in
electric vehicles. World Electr. Veh. J. 2018, 9, 23. [CrossRef]
7. Islam, E.S.; Moawad, A.; Kim, N.; Rousseau, A. Vehicle electrification impacts on energy consumption for different connected-
autonomous vehicle scenario runs. World Electr. Veh. J. 2020, 11, 9. [CrossRef]
8. Messagie, M.; Boureima, F.S.; Coosemans, T.; Macharis, C.; van Mierlo, J. A range-based vehicle life cycle assessment incorporating
variability in the environmental assessment of different vehicle technologies and fuels. Energies 2014, 7, 1467–1482. [CrossRef]
9. Marmiroli, B.; Messagie, M.; Dotelli, G.; van Mierlo, J. Electricity Generation in LCA of Electric Vehicles: A Review. Appl. Sci.
2018, 8, 1384. [CrossRef]
10. Rangaraju, S. Impacts of electricity mix, charging profile, and driving behavior on the emissions performance of battery electric
vehicles. A Belgian case study. Appl. Energy 2015, 148, 496–505. [CrossRef]
11. Chan, C.C. The state of the art of electric, hybrid, and fuel cell vehicles. Proc. IEEE 2007, 95, 704–718. [CrossRef]
12. Yong, J.Y.; Ramachandaramurthy, V.K.; Tan, K.M.; Mithulananthan, N. A review on the state-of-the-art technologies of electric
vehicle, its impacts and prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 49, 365–385. [CrossRef]
13. Shariff, S.M.; Iqbal, D.; Alam, M.S.; Ahmad, F. A State of the Art Review of Electric Vehicle to Grid (V2G) technology. In IOP
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 561.
14. Tran, D.D.; Vafaeipour, M.; el Baghdadi, M.; Barrero, R.; van Mierlo, J.; Hegazy, O. Thorough state-of-the-art analysis of electric
and hybrid vehicle powertrains: Topologies and integrated energy management strategies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 119,
109596. [CrossRef]
15. Hannan, M.A.; Hoque, M.M.; Hussain, A.; Yusof, Y.; Ker, P.J. State-of-the-Art and Energy Management System of Lithium-Ion
Batteries in Electric Vehicle Applications: Issues and Recommendations. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 19362–19378. [CrossRef]
16. Foley, A.M.; Winning, I.J.; Gallachóir, B.P. State-of-the-art in electric vehicle charging infrastructure. In Proceedings of the 2010
IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Lille, France, 1–3 September 2010.
17. Ehsani, M.; Gao, Y.; Emadi, A. Electric Propulsion Systems. In Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles; CRC Press;
Taylor & Francis Group: Oxford, UK, 2017.
18. Chen, K.; Bouscayrol, A.; Lhomme, W. Energetic Macroscopic Representation and Inversion-based Control: Application to an
Electric Vehicle with an Electrical Differential. J. Asian Electr. Veh. 2008, 6, 1097–1102. [CrossRef]
19. Chan, C.C.; Bouscayrol, A.; Chen, K. Electric, hybrid, and fuel-cell vehicles: Architectures and modeling. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.
2010, 59, 589–598. [CrossRef]
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 23 of 26

20. Koot, M.; Kessels, J.T.B.A.; de Jager, B.; Heemels, W.P.M.H.; van den Bosch, P.P.J.; Steinbuch, M. Energy management strategies
for vehicular electric power systems. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2005, 54, 771–782. [CrossRef]
21. Hofman, T.; Steinbuch, M.; van Druten, R.; Serrarens, A. Rule-based energy management strategies for hybrid vehicles. Int. J.
Electr. Hybrid Veh. 2007, 1, 71–94. [CrossRef]
22. Madni, A.; Madni, C.; Lucero, S. Leveraging Digital Twin Technology in Model-Based Systems Engineering. Systems 2019, 7, 7.
[CrossRef]
23. Wu, B.; Widanage, W.D.; Yang, S.; Liu, X. Battery digital twins: Perspectives on the fusion of models, data and artificial intelligence
for smart battery management systems. Energy AI 2020, 1, 100016. [CrossRef]
24. Microsemi, P.P.G. Gallium Nitride (GaN) versus Silicon Carbide (SiC) in the High Frequency (RF) and Power Switching
Applications. Available online: https://www.richardsonrfpd.com/docs/rfpd/Microsemi-A-Comparison-of-Gallium-Nitride-
Versus-Silicon-Carbide.pdf (accessed on 3 February 2021).
25. Rasool, H.; el Baghdadi, M.; Rauf, A.M.; Zhaksylyk, A.; Hegazy, O. A rapid non-linear computation model of power loss and
electro thermal behaviour of three-phase inverters in EV drivetrains. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Symposium on
Power Electronics, Electrical Drives, Automation and Motion (SPEEDAM), Sorrento, Italy, 24–26 June 2020.
26. Keshmiri, N.; Wang, D.; Agrawal, B.; Hou, R.; Emadi, A. Current Status and Future Trends of GaN HEMTs in Electrified
Transportation. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 70553–70571. [CrossRef]
27. Sewergin, A.; Wienhausen, A.H.; Oberdieck, K.; de Doncker, R.W. Modular bidirectional full-SiC DC-DC converter for automotive
applications. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 12th International Conference on Power Electronics and Drive Systems (PEDS),
Honolulu, HI, USA, 12–15 December 2017.
28. Rui, R. Power Stage of 48V BSG Inverter. Infineon Appl. Note. Available online: https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-2018
0802_AN-Power_stage_of_48V_BSG_inverter_V2.2-AN-v01_00-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d46265487f7b0165a3863b8e5bcf (accessed on
3 February 2021).
29. Liu, Z.; Li, B.; Lee, F.C.; Li, Q. High-Efficiency High-Density Critical Mode Rectifier/Inverter for WBG-Device-Based On-Board
Charger. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 64, 9114–9123. [CrossRef]
30. Rasool, H.; Zhaksylyk, A.; Chakraborty, S.; el Baghdadi, M.; Hegazy, O. Optimal Design Strategy and Electro-Thermal Modelling
of a High-Power Off-Board Charger for Electric Vehicle Applications. In Proceedings of the 2020 Fifteenth International Conference
on Ecological Vehicles and Renewable Energies (EVER), Monte-Carlo, Monaco, 10–12 September 2020; pp. 1–8.
31. Chakraborty, S.; Vu, H.; Hasan, M.M.; Tran, D.; el Baghdadi, M.; Hegazy, O. DC-DC Converter Topologies for Electric Vehicles,
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles and Fast Charging Stations: State of the Art and Future Trends. Energies 2019, 12, 1569. [CrossRef]
32. Lu, L.; Han, X.; Li, J.; Hua, J.; Ouyang, M. A review on the key issues for lithium-ion battery management in electric vehicles. J.
Power Sources 2013, 226, 272–288. [CrossRef]
33. Fuchs, G.; Lunz, B.; Leuthold, M.; Sauer, D.U. Technology Overview on Electricity Storage. Inst. Power Electron. Electr. Drives 2012.
[CrossRef]
34. Li, M.; Lu, J.; Chen, Z.; Amine, K. 30 Years of Lithium-Ion Batteries. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1800561. [CrossRef]
35. Sun, Y.K.; Myung, S.T.; Park, B.C.; Prakash, J.; Belharouak, I.; Amine, K. High-energy cathode material for long-life and safe
lithium batteries. Nat. Mater. 2009, 8, 320–324. [CrossRef]
36. Philippot, M.; Alvarez, G.; Ayerbe, E.; van Mierlo, J.; Messagie, M. Eco-efficiency of a lithium-ion battery for electric vehicles:
Influence of manufacturing country and commodity prices on ghg emissions and costs. Batteries 2019, 5, 23. [CrossRef]
37. Schmuch, R.; Wagner, R.; Hörpel, G.; Placke, T.; Winter, M. Performance and cost of materials for lithium-based rechargeable
automotive batteries. Nat. Energy 2018, 3, 267–278. [CrossRef]
38. Xie, J.; Lu, Y.C. A retrospective on lithium-ion batteries. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1–4. [CrossRef]
39. Gopalakrishnan, R.; Goutam, S.; Miguel Oliveira, L.; Timmermans, J.M.; Omar, N.; Messagie, M.; Van den Bossche, P.; Van Mierlo,
J. A comprehensive study on rechargeable energy storage technologies. J. Electrochem. Energy Convers. Storage 2016. [CrossRef]
40. Berckmans, G.; De Sutter, L.; Marinaro, M.; Smekens, J.; Jaguemont, J.; Wohlfahrt-Mehrens, M.; van Mierlo, J.; Omar, N. Analysis
of the effect of applying external mechanical pressure on next generation silicon alloy lithium-ion cells. Electrochim. Acta 2019,
306, 387–395. [CrossRef]
41. Edström, K. BATTERY 2030+. Inventing the Sustainable Batteries of the Future. Research Needs and Future Actions. Available
online: https://battery2030.eu/digitalAssets/860/c_860904-l_1-k_roadmap-27-march.pdf (accessed on 3 February 2021).
42. Till, B. Global EV Outlook 2019 to Electric Mobility; IEA: London, UK, 2019.
43. Pasta, M.; Armstrong, D.; Brown, Z.L.; Bu, J.; Castell, M.R.; Chen, P.; Cocks, A.; Corr, S.A.; Cussen, E.J.; Darnbrough, E. 2020
roadmap on solid-state batteries. J. Phys. Energy 2020, 2, 032008. [CrossRef]
44. Randau, S.; Weber, D.A.; Kötz, O.; Koerver, R.; Braun, P.; Weber, A.; Ivers-Tiffée, E.; Adermann, T.; Kulisch, J.; Zeier, W.G.; et al.
Benchmarking the performance of all-solid-state lithium batteries. Nat. Energy 2020, 5, 259–270. [CrossRef]
45. Albertus, P.; Babinec, S.; Litzelman, S.; Newman, A. Status and challenges in enabling the lithium metal electrode for high-energy
and low-cost rechargeable batteries. Nat. Energy 2018, 3, 16–21. [CrossRef]
46. Peled, E.; Menkin, S. Review—SEI: Past, Present and Future. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2017, 164, A1703. [CrossRef]
47. Forsyth, M.; Porcarelli, L.; Wang, X.; Goujon, N.; Mecerreyes, D. Innovative Electrolytes Based on Ionic Liquids and Polymers for
Next-Generation Solid-State Batteries. Acc. Chem. Res. 2019, 52, 686–694. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 24 of 26

48. Jeong, K.; Park, S.; Lee, S.Y. Revisiting polymeric single lithium-ion conductors as an organic route for all-solid-state lithium ion
and metal batteries. J. Mater. Chem. A 2019, 7, 1917–1935. [CrossRef]
49. Kerman, K.; Luntz, A.; Viswanathan, V.; Chiang, Y.-M.; Chen, Z. Review—Practical Challenges Hindering the Development of
Solid State Li Ion Batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2017, 164, A1731. [CrossRef]
50. Garbayo, I.; Struzik, M.; Bowman, W.J.; Pfenninger, R.; Stilp, E.; Rupp, J.L.M. Glass-Type Polyamorphism in Li-Garnet Thin Film
Solid State Battery Conductors. Adv. Energy Mater. 2018, 8, 1702265. [CrossRef]
51. Smekens, J.; Gopalakrishnan, R.; Steen, N.V.; Omar, N.; Hegazy, O.; Hubin, A.; Van Mierlo, J. Influence of electrode density on the
performance of Li-ion batteries: Experimental and simulation results. Energies 2016, 9, 104. [CrossRef]
52. Krauskopf, T.; Mogwitz, B.; Rosenbach, C.; Zeier, W.G.; Janek, J. Diffusion Limitation of Lithium Metal and Li–Mg Alloy Anodes
on LLZO Type Solid Electrolytes as a Function of Temperature and Pressure. Adv. Energy Mater. 2019, 9, 1902568. [CrossRef]
53. Truchot, C.; Dubarry, M.; Liaw, B.Y. State-of-charge estimation and uncertainty for lithium-ion battery strings. Appl. Energy 2014,
119, 218–227. [CrossRef]
54. Li, Y.; Liu, K.; Foley, A.M.; Zülke, A.; Berecibar, M.; Nanini-Maury, E.; Van Mierlo, J.; Hoster, H.E. Data-driven health estimation
and lifetime prediction of lithium-ion batteries: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 113, 109254. [CrossRef]
55. de Sutter, L.; Berckmans, G.; Marinaro, M.; Wohlfahrt-Mehrens, M.; Berecibar, M.; van Mierlo, J. Mechanical behavior of Silicon-
Graphite pouch cells under external compressive load: Implications and opportunities for battery pack design. J. Power Sources
2020, 451, 227774. [CrossRef]
56. Campanella, A.; Döhler, D.; Binder, W.H. Self-Healing in Supramolecular Polymers. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2018, 39, 1700739.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
57. Wang, C.; Wu, H.; Chen, Z.; Mcdowell, M.T.; Cui, Y.; Bao, Z. Self-healing chemistry enables the stable operation of silicon
microparticle anodes for high-energy lithium-ion batteries. Nat. Chem. 2013, 5, 1042. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
58. Bobba, S.; Mathieux, F.; Blengini, G.A. How will second-use of batteries affect stocks and flows in the EU? A model for traction
Li-ion batteries. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 145, 279–291. [CrossRef]
59. Berecibar, M.; Gandiaga, I.; Villarreal, I.; Omar, N.; van Mierlo, J.; van den Bossche, P. Critical review of state of health estimation
methods of Li-ion batteries for real applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 56, 572–587. [CrossRef]
60. Berecibar, M. Machine-learning techniques used to accurately predict battery life. Nature 2019, 568, 325–326. [CrossRef]
61. Langer, E. Liquid Cooling in Electric Vehicles—What to Know to Keep EVs on the Go By; CPC: Preston, UK, 2019.
62. SHabib; Khan, M.M.; Abbas, F.; Tang, H. Assessment of electric vehicles concerning impacts, charging infrastructure with
unidirectional and bidirectional chargers, and power flow comparisons. Int. J. Energy Res. 2018, 42, 3416–3441.
63. Chatterjee, P.; Hermwille, M. Tackling the Challenges of Electric Vehicle Fast Charging. ATZelectron. Worldw. 2020, 15, 18–22.
[CrossRef]
64. Dusmez, S.; Cook, A.; Khaligh, A. Comprehensive analysis of high quality power converters for level 3 off-board chargers. In
Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, 6–9 September 2011.
65. Salgado-Herrera, N.M.; Anaya-Lara, O.; Campos-Gaona, D.; Medina-Rios, A.; Tapia-Sanchez, R.; Rodriguez-Rodriguez, J.R.
Active Front-End converter applied for the THD reduction in power systems. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Power & Energy
Society General Meeting (PESGM), Portland, OR, USA, 5–10 August 2018.
66. Kesler, M.; Kisacikoglu, M.C.; Tolbert, L.M. Vehicle-to-grid reactive power operation using plug-in electric vehicle bidirectional
offboard charger. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2014, 61, 6778–6784. [CrossRef]
67. Vu, H.N.; Abdel-Monem, M.; el Baghdadi, M.; van Mierlo, J.; Hegazy, O. Multi-objective optimization of on-board chargers based
on state-of-the-art 650V GaN power transistors for the application of electric vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Vehicle
Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC), Hanoi, Vietnam, 14–17 October 2019.
68. Yilmaz, M.; Krein, P.T. Review of Battery Charger Topologies, Charging Power Levels, and Infrastructure for Plug-In Electric and
Hybrid Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2013, 28, 2151–2169. [CrossRef]
69. Xue, L.; Shen, Z.; Boroyevich, D.; Mattavelli, P.; Diaz, D. Dual Active Bridge-Based Battery Charger for Plug-in Hybrid Electric
Vehicle With Charging Current Containing Low Frequency Ripple. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 7299–7307. [CrossRef]
70. Li, B.; Lee, F.C.; Li, Q.; Liu, Z. Bi-directional on-board charger architecture and control for achieving ultra-high efficiency with
wide battery voltage range. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC),
Tampa, FL, USA, 26–30 March 2017; pp. 3688–3694.
71. Zhaksylyk, A.; Rasool, H.; Geury, T.; el Baghdadi, M.; Hegazy, O. Masterless Control of Parallel Modular Active front-end (AFE)
Systems for Vehicles and Stationary Applications. In Proceedings of the 2020 Fifteenth International Conference on Ecological
Vehicles and Renewable Energies (EVER), Monte-Carlo, Monaco, 10–12 September 2020; pp. 1–6.
72. Rachid, A.; El Fadil, H.; Koundi, M.; El Idrissi, Z.; Tahri, A.; Giri, F.; Guerrero, J.M. PQ Theory-Based Control of Single-Stage V2G
Three-Phase BEV Charger for High-Voltage Battery. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019, 52, 73–78. [CrossRef]
73. Salgado-Herrera, N.M.; Campos-Gaona, D.; Anaya-Lara, O.; Medina-Rios, A.; Tapia-Sánchez, R.; Rodríguez-Rodríguez, J.R. THD
reduction in wind energy system using type-4 Wind Turbine/PMSG applying the active front-end converter parallel operation.
Energies 2018, 11, 2458. [CrossRef]
74. Xing, K.; Lee, F.C.; Borojevic, D.; Ye, Z.; Mazumder, S. Interleaved PWM with discontinuous space-vector modulation. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 1999, 14, 906–917. [CrossRef]
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 25 of 26

75. Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Xie, S.; Yang, C. A control strategy for paralleled bi-directional DC-DC converters used in energy storage
systems. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Milwaukee, WI, USA, 18–22
September 2016.
76. Pei, Y.; Jiang, G.; Yang, X.; Wang, Z. Auto-Master-Slave control technique of parallel inverters in distributed AC power systems
and UPS. In Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE 35th Annual Power Electronics Specialists Conference (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37551),
Aachen, Germany, 20–25 June 2004; Volume 3.
77. Meng, P.; Jian, Z.; Li, W.; Wang, Y. The study and application of CAN communication of rectifier parallel operation control system.
In Proceedings of the 2016 19th International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS), Chiba, Japan, 13–16
November 2016.
78. Zhang, H.; Shi, Y.; Wang, J.; Chen, H. A New Delay-Compensation Scheme for Networked Control Systems in Controller Area
Networks. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 7239–7247. [CrossRef]
79. Gray, M.S.; Gao, Z.; Button, R.M. Distributed, master-less control of modular DC-DC converters. In Proceedings of the 2nd
International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Providence, RI, USA, 16–19 August 2004; Volume 3.
80. Blaabjerg, F.; Teodorescu, R.; Liserre, M.; Timbus, A.V. Overview of control and grid synchronization for distributed power
generation systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2006, 53, 1398–1409. [CrossRef]
81. Messagie, M.; Mertens, J.; Oliveira, L.; Rangaraju, S.; Sanfelix, J.; Coosemans, T.; Van Mierlo, J.; Macharis, C. The hourly life cycle
carbon footprint of electricity generation in Belgium, bringing a temporal resolution in life cycle assessment. Appl. Energy 2014,
134, 469–476. [CrossRef]
82. Van Mierlo, J. The World Electric Vehicle Journal, The Open Access Journal for the e-Mobility Scene. World Electr. Veh. J. 2018, 9, 1.
[CrossRef]
83. i, Y.; Messagie, M.; Berecibar, M.; Hegazy, O.; Omar, N.; Van Mierlo, J. The impact of the vehicle-to-grid strategy on lithium-ion
battery ageing process. In Proceedings of the 31st International Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS 2018), Kobe,
Japan, 30 September–3 October 2018.
84. van Kriekinge, G.; de Cauwer, C.; van Mierlo, J.; Coosemans, T. Techno-Economical Assessment of Vehicle-to-Grid in a Microgrid:
Case Study. In Proceedings of the 33th International Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS 2020), Portland, OR, USA,
14–17 June 2020.
85. Syed, A.; Crispeels, T.; Jahir Roncancio Marin, J.; Cardellini, G.; De Cauwer, C.; Coosemans, T.; van Mierlo, J.; Messagie, M.
A Novel Method to Value the EV-Fleet’s Grid Balancing Capacity. In Proceedings of the 33th International Electric Vehicle
Symposium and Exhibition (EVS 2020), Portland, OR, USA, 14–17 June 2020.
86. De Cauwer, C.; van Kriekinge, G.; van Mierlo, J.; Coosemans, T.; Messagie, M. Integration of Vehicle-to-Grid in Local Energy
Systems: Concepts and Specific Requirements. In Proceedings of the 33th International Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition
(EVS 2020), Portland, OR, USA, 14–17 June 2020.
87. Arrinda, M.; Berecibar, M.; Oyarbide, M.; Macicior, H.; Muxika, E.; Messagie, M. Levelized cost of electricity calculation of the
energy generation plant of a CO2 neutral micro-grid. Energy 2020, 208, 118383. [CrossRef]
88. Hooftman, N.; Messagie, M.; van Mierlo, J.; Coosemans, T. The Paris Agreement and Zero-Emission Vehicles in Europe: Scenarios
for the Road Towards a Decarbonised Passenger Car Fleet. In Towards User-Centric Transport in Europe 2; Springer: Cham,
Switzerland, 2020.
89. Messagie, M.; Coosemans, T.; van Mierlo, J. The need for uncertainty propagation in life cycle assessment of vehicle technologies.
In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC), Hanoi, Vietnam, 14–17 October 2019.
90. Narayanan, S.; Chaniotakis, E.; Antoniou, C. Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review. Transp. Res. Part C
Emerg. Technol. 2020, 111, 255–293. [CrossRef]
91. Loeb, B.; Kockelman, K.M. Fleet performance and cost evaluation of a shared autonomous electric vehicle (SAEV) fleet: A case
study for Austin, Texas. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2019, 121, 374–385. [CrossRef]
92. Golbabaei, F.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Bunker, J. The role of shared autonomous vehicle systems in delivering smart urban mobility: A
systematic review of the literature. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2020, 1–18. [CrossRef]
93. Haas, H. Wireless Data from Every Light Bulb. Available online: https://www.ted.com/talks/harald_haas_wireless_data_from_
every_light_bulb/transcript (accessed on 3 February 2021).
94. Maurer, M.; Christian Gerdes, J.; Lenz, B.; Winner, H. Autonomous Driving. Technical, Legal and Social Aspects; Springer: Berlin,
Germany, 2016.
95. Fagnant, D.J.; Kockelman, K. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: Opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations.
Transp. Res. Part A 2015, 77, 167–181. [CrossRef]
96. Cohen, T.; Cavoli, C. Automated vehicles: Exploring possible consequences of government (non)intervention for congestion and
accessibility. Transp. Rev. 2019, 39, 129–151. [CrossRef]
97. Chen, T.D.; Kockelman, K.M.; Hanna, J.P. Operations of a shared, autonomous, electric vehicle fleet: Implications of vehicle &
charging infrastructure decisions. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2016, 94, 243–254.
98. Iacobucci, R.; Mclellan, B.; Tezuka, T. Modeling shared autonomous electric vehicles: Potential for transport and power grid
integration. Energy 2018, 158, 148–163. [CrossRef]
99. Miao, K.; Ramachandaramurthy, V.K.; Yong, J.Y. Integration of electric vehicles in smart grid: A review on vehicle to grid
technologies and optimization techniques. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 53, 720–732.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 20 26 of 26

100. Rangaraju, S. Environmental Performance of Battery Electric Vehicles—Implications for Future Integrated Electricity and
Transport System. Ph.D. Thesis, Vrije Univeristiet Brussel, Brussels, Belgium, 2018.
101. Jones, E.C.; Leibowicz, B.D. Contributions of shared autonomous vehicles to climate change mitigation. Transp. Res. Part D Transp.
Environ. 2019, 72, 279–298. [CrossRef]