臺灣電動車輛均化充電成本評估與敏感度分析

ASSESSMENT AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING COSTS IN TAIWAN: A LEVELIZED COST MODEL APPROACH

臺灣政府訂立了2050年淨零排放目標，其中交通部門被視為關鍵領域。達成此目標的重要策略之一是推動電動車輛的普及。然而，在推廣電動車輛的過程中，了解其成本是至關重要的。過去的研究主要集中在比較電動車輛與傳統燃油車的總擁有成本，考慮了購買成本和後續運營成本，但在計算燃料成本時，通常僅考慮單一的電價費率作為充電成本。然而，充電成本實際上受到多個因素的影響，包括充電地點、時段、車輛使用情況、充電功率和充電設備購置與安裝成本等。為了全面地評估臺灣目前的電動車輛充電成本，本研究採用均化充電模型（Levelized Cost of Charging），考慮了不同充電場所（住宅、辦公大樓和公共充電），並納入不同的電價方案（累計電價、時間電價）、充電時段（尖峰、離峰）和車輛行駛里程等關鍵因素。結果指出，在「電動車專用電價方案」下，在離峰時段進行充電能顯著減少充電成本，特別是對公共充電運營商而言。研究同時發現，由於居民的車輛使用習慣和行駛里程在不同縣市間有顯著差異，這些差異導致住宅充電成本在各地區間存在不均等現象。另外，辦公大樓和社區大樓是均化充電成本最低和最高的場所。進一步的敏感度分析顯示，在住宅場所中，行駛里程是影響均化成本的關鍵因素；而對於辦公大樓和公共充電站而言，充電時間是最重要的影響因素。此外，提高充電樁的使用率可以顯著降低均化充電成本。目前，辦公大樓和公共場所的均化充電成本已足以與傳統燃油車的燃料成本相互競爭。當使用率高於5.20%至7.95%時，辦公大樓和公共場所的電動車每單位公里能量成本將低於臺灣歷史最低的燃油車燃料成本。本研究的發現提供政策制定者具學術與實務價值的參考依據，有助於推動電動車輛的發展和普及化。

This study examines the cost implications of electric vehicles (EVs) in Taiwan, with a focus on promoting their widespread adoption to achieve the government's 2050 net-zero emissions target. Previous research has primarily compared the total ownership costs of EVs and conventional fuel vehicles, considering purchase and operational expenses. However, such studies often simplify charging costs by using a single electricity price rate. In reality, charging costs are influenced by various factors, including location, charging time, vehicle usage patterns, charging power, and equipment-related expenses. To comprehensively assess the current charging costs in Taiwan, this research employs a Levelized Cost of Charging (LCOC) model. The analysis considers different charging sites (residential, workplace, and public charging), electricity pricing schemes (stepwise power tariff, time-of-use tariffs), charging times (peak and off-peak), and vehicle driving distances. The results indicate that utilizing the ''Electric Vehicle Special Utility Rate'' during off-peak hours can significantly reduce levelized charging costs, which is especially advantageous for operators of public charging facilities. The study also uncovers substantial regional disparities in residential charging costs across different counties and cities, attributed to the considerable differences in residents’vehicle usage patterns and driving distances. Workplace and community (residential) charging sites exhibit the lowest and highest LCOC, respectively. Sensitivity analysis highlights driving distance as a key cost factor for residential charging, while charging time significantly impacts workplace and public charging costs. Moreover, increasing the utilization rate of charging infrastructure substantially lowers LCOC. Currently, the LCOC for workplace and public charging sites is competitive with the fuel costs of conventional gasoline vehicles. Notably, when the utilization rate exceeds 5.20% to 7.95%, the per-kilometer energy replenishment cost of EVs in workplace and public settings becomes lower than the historically lowest fuel costs of gasoline vehicles in Taiwan. These findings offer valuable academic and practical insights for policymakers to support the development and widespread adoption of EVs, aligning with Taiwan's emission reduction goals.