Skip to main content
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Advancing Grid Resilience through Smart Charge Management: Findings from Maryland’s Pilot

Technical Report ·
DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/2574050· OSTI ID:2574050
 [1];  [1];  [1];  [1];  [1];  [2];  [2]
  1. Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States)
  2. Univ. of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL (United States)
This report presents research findings from a four-year Smart Charge Management (SCM) pilot program conducted by Maryland’s largest electric utilities—Baltimore Gas and Electric (BGE), Potomac Electric Power Company (Pepco), and Delmarva Power & Light (DPL)—to evaluate strategies for optimizing electric vehicle (EV) charging loads and enhancing grid stability. Supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Argonne National Laboratory collaborated with all project partners and examined the effectiveness of Time-of-Use (TOU) and Load Balancing (LB) strategies in managing peak demand, deferring costly infrastructure upgrades, and reducing grid constraints at the feeder level. Using charging data from over 4,600 EV drivers, the study analyzed SCM’s impact on the distribution systems of BGE and Pepco, which consists of over 2000 feeders. Unlike prior research that focused on system-wide trends or synthetic feeders, this analysis offers granular, feeder-level insights based on real-world operational data. It highlights how transformer density, load profiles, and infrastructure constraints influence smart charging performance. Results show feeder-level conditions play a crucial role in SCM effectiveness, with most feeders benefiting more from LB, while TOU-based SCM may be sufficient for others. By 2035, LB reduced peak charging loads by 27% on average, compared to 23% under TOU-based SCM, though some feeders saw reductions exceeding 35%, while others experienced minimal impact. Feeders with higher transformer utilization and limited capacity benefited more from LB, which more effectively distributed charging demand during off-peak hours. Beyond reducing grid constraints, SCM offers long-term operational and financial benefits. By shifting EV charging demand strategically, utilities can optimize asset utilization, delay infrastructure investments, and enhance grid performance. In terms of infrastructure upgrade deferrals, at the feeder level, LB consistently reduced peak charging loads and resulting infrastructure upgrade costs, particularly in high EV enrollment areas, decreasing the number of overloaded transformers by up to 35%, while TOU-based SCM achieved 20-30% reductions depending on feeder characteristics. At the system level, LB has the potential to defer total upgrade costs by $$\$$$$186 million for BGE, compared to $$\$$$$159 million under TOU-based SCM. For Pepco, TOU-based SCM performed slightly better, deferring upgrade costs by $$\$$$$30 million, compared to $$\$$$$29 million under LB. Section 4.5 reviews some of the system differences between BGE and Pepco. However, as EV adoption scales, TOU-based SCM will introduce secondary peak charging loads, reinforcing the need for more advanced, adaptive SCM approaches to prevent new grid challenges. As EV adoption continues to grow, feeder-level managed charging strategies will be essential for mitigating grid stress, improving infrastructure efficiency, and maintaining energy affordability for consumers. This report provides critical insights for utilities, Public Utility Commissions (PUCs), and state agencies on the role of feeder-specific smart charging in infrastructure planning, policy development, and grid modernization. The findings underscore the importance of tailored, data-driven SCM solutions that align with local grid conditions, ensuring a resilient, cost-effective transition to increasing EV adoption while safeguarding distribution system performance.
Research Organization:
Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States)
Sponsoring Organization:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Office of Sustainable Transportation. Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO)
DOE Contract Number:
AC02-06CH11357
OSTI ID:
2574050
Report Number(s):
ANL--25/14; 197514
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English