Replicating e-mobility solutions PDF Free Download

Name: Replicating e-mobility solutions PDF
Author: Vanessa Buchanan

1 / 95

1 views•95 pages

Replicating e-mobility solutions PDF Free Download

Replicating e-mobility solutions PDF free Download. Think more deeply and widely.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Alexander Schmidt, Breogan Sanchez, Gregorio Fernandez, Fernando Velazquez, Florian

Herrmann

August 2025

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency

Established by the European Commission

CINEA

Contact: Olav Luyckx

Email: olav.luyckx@ec.europa.eu

European Commission

B-1049 Brussels

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Replicating e-mobility solutions

European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA)

‘Support for the Smart Cities and Communities Lighthouse Project Group’

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Version history

Version

Date

Comments

v.01

28.06.2025

Consolidated version before Validation Workshop

v.02

07.07.2025

Revisions from the Mid-term report integrated

v.03

11.07.2025

Peer-Reviewed (Internal) Final version

v.03b

18.07.2025

Feedback and consent from external contributors

received and integrated.

v.04

25.07.2025

Revisions from AIT integrated

v.05

14.08.2025

Revisions from AIT integrated (proofreading)

v.05b

18.08.2025

Layout check.

v.06

23.08.2025

Revisions from CINEA integrated (proofreading).

Authors:

Alexander Schmidt (BABLE Smart Cities), Breogan Sanchez (BABLE Smart Cities), Gregorio

Fernandez (No affiliation), Fernando Velazquez (No affiliation), Florian Herrmann (Lindholmen

Science Park)

Internal Reviewers

Melike Nur Ülsever (BABLE Smart Cities), Georges El Sayegh (BABLE Smart Cities)

External contributors:

Eva Sunnerstedt (City of Stockholm), Omar Shafqat (Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences

(AUAS/HvA)), Melina Rosendahl (AIT) Anna Kamps (AIT), Miguel Zarzuela (CIRCE Technological

Centre), Matthijs Kok (Gemeente Utrecht), José Alberto Solanas (Zaragoza City Council), Stephan

Hartmann (WieNeu+), Juan Carlos Escudero (City of Vitoria-Gasteiz), Tom Jensen (City of

Trondheim), Jesús Alonso (CEO Solaris bus), Gerd Seehuus (City of Stavanger), Philip Angus

(Nottingham Energy Partnership), Dirk Ahlers (NTNU), Bojan Schnabl (City of Vienna)

LEGAL NOTICE

This document has been prepared for the European Commission. It reflects the views only of the

authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the

information contained therein.

Replicating e-mobility solutions 
 
 
 

 
Table of Contents 
Executive summary ............................................................................................................. 4 
Introduction ............................................................................................................ 6 
State-of-the-art ....................................................................................................... 7 
1 Scientific literature: technical innovation ................................................................... 14 
1.1 Smart charging ................................................................................................... 15 
1.2 Smart charging networks ..................................................................................... 16 
1.3 Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) .......................................................................................... 16 
1.4 Ultra-fast charging technology and low grid impact charge points .............................. 17 
1.5 Smart navigation and charging apps ...................................................................... 17 
1.6 Procedures to allow seamless payment and access across charging providers. ............ 17 
1.7 Wireless (inductive) charging ................................................................................ 18 
1.8 Standardisation of charging protocols .................................................................... 19 
1.9 Battery advancements ......................................................................................... 19 
1.10 State-of-the-art examples in scalable cities’ projects ............................................. 20 
2 Grey literature: Policy measures ................................................................................. 21 
2.1 Policy frameworks supporting e-mobility in cities..................................................... 21 
2.2 Key market trends affecting e-mobility adoption ..................................................... 24 
3 Key insights from the state-of-the-art ......................................................................... 29 
Case studies, multicriteria analysis and evaluation ..................................................... 30 
1 Successful upscaling of e-mobility (methodology) ......................................................... 30 
1.1 Solution modules for the successful introduction and spread of e-mobility .................. 30 
1.2 Success factors for the upscaling of electromobility per solution module..................... 31 
2 Selection of cities ..................................................................................................... 35 
3 Evaluation of the case studies (cities) per solution module ............................................. 41 
3.1 Charging infrastructure – Public charging system .................................................... 42 
3.2 Electrification of fleets – Electric bus system ........................................................... 43 
3.3 Electrification of fleets – Last-mile delivery ............................................................. 44 
3.4 Electrification of fleets – Vehicle-sharing system ..................................................... 46 
3.5 Vehicle-to-grid – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging ............................................ 47 
4 Validation workshops ................................................................................................ 49 
4.1 Onsite workshop – Zaragoza ................................................................................ 49 
4.2 Online final validation workshop ............................................................................ 50 
5 Insights from the selected SCC cities........................................................................... 51 
General conclusions ............................................................................................... 60 
Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 61 
Annex: Guidelines for city practitioners on how to enable and upscale e-mobility solutions ......... 68 
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 68 
2 Key barriers to upscale e-mobility solutions ................................................................. 69 
3 Replication and success factors. Practical six steps for cities to enable e-mobility .............. 74 

Replicating e-mobility solutions

4.3.1 E-mobility solutions replication template ................................................................ 81

4.3.2 Annotated model e-mobility solutions replication template ....................................... 85

List of Figures

Figure 1: Overview of the work performed ............................................................................. 4

Figure 2: Roadmap’s 6 step methodology ............................................................................... 5

Figure 3: Project management and coordination (under a Triple Helix Approach) ........................ 6

Figure 4: Global stock of public charging points by region, 2018-2024 [13] ................................ 9

Figure 5: Comparison of lifetime emissions of internal combustion, hybrid, and electric vehicles in

the same category. Source: IEA EV Life Cycle Assessment Calculator ...................................... 12

Figure 6: The value chain in the production of batteries and electric buses and its distribution by

region.............................................................................................................................. 13

Figure 7: Successful upscaling of e-mobility solutions ............................................................ 30

Figure 8: Selection of cities based on predefined criteria ........................................................ 35

Figure 9: Banner used to promote the validation open workshop ............................................ 51

Figure 10: Comparison of baseline and post-project implementation ....................................... 74

List of Tables

Table 1: The most relevant tested technologies in the 20 SCC projects .................................... 20

Table 2: E-mobility solutions analysed during the study ......................................................... 31

Table 3: Success factors – Public charging system ................................................................ 31

Table 4: Success factors – Electric bus system ..................................................................... 32

Table 5: Success factors – Last-mile delivery ........................................................................ 33

Table 6: Success factors – Vehicle-sharing system ................................................................ 33

Table 7: Success factors – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging ............................................. 34

Table 8: Selection of cities per solution ................................................................................ 36

Table 9: Summary of technical standards considered per solution ........................................... 76

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AC Alternating Current

AFID Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive

AFIR Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation

AI Artificial Intelligence

ATM Milan public transport agency

AUAS Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences

CCS Combined Charging System

CENELEC European Committee for Standardization and Electrotechnical Standardization

CINEA European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency

CPO Charging Point Operators

CWA CEN Workshop Agreement

DC Direct Current

DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung (German institute for standardization)

E-BAT Early Barrier Assessment Tool

eMSPs E-mobility service providers

EU European Union

EUCF European City Facility

EV Electric Vehicle

GHG Greenhouse Gas

ICE Internal Combustion Engine

IEA International Energy Agency

IEC International Electrotechnical Commission

ISO International Organisation for Standardization

LCA Life Cycle Assessment

LEZ Low Emissions Zones

LFP Lithium Iron Phosphate

MaaS Mobility as a Service

MW Megawatt

NMS New Mobility Services

OCHP Open Clearing House Protocol

OCPI Open Charge Point Interface

OCPP Open Charge Point Protocol

OICP Open InterCharge Protocol

PCI Public Charging infrastructure

PM Particulate Matter

PV Photovoltaics

ROI Return on Investment

SAE Society of Automotive Engineers

SCC Smart Cities and Communities

SULP Sustainable Urban Logistics Plan

SUMP Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats analysis

TCO Total Cost of Ownership

V2B Vehicle-to-building

V2G Vehicle-to-grid

V2X Vehicle-to-everything

VAS Value-added services

VDV Verband Deutscher Verkehrsunternehmen (Association of German Transport Companies)

UFC Ultra-fast Charging stations

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Executive summary

The large-scale deployment of electric mobility (e-mobility) is a critical enabler of Europe’s transition

toward sustainable, inclusive, and climate-neutral cities. While progress is visible in many urban

contexts, barriers—both structural and systemic—continue to hinder the widespread adoption and

replication of successful e-mobility solutions across European territories. In this context, the

Scalable Cities Call for Experts 2024 mobilised a team of specialists to deliver actionable

knowledge, best practices, and practical guidance to help cities overcome challenges and scale e-

mobility innovations effectively.

This report distils insights from 20 Smart Cities and Communities (SCC) Lighthouse and Fellow Cities,

complemented by extensive stakeholder engagement and technical analysis. It delivers a structured

roadmap and practical guidelines aimed at supporting cities, EU smart city stakeholders, and

practitioners in navigating the full policy, financial, operational, and social ecosystem necessary for

scaling e-mobility solutions.

As a key insight from the report, electric mobility is a cornerstone of the European Green Deal,

with electric vehicles (EVs) contributing not only to decarbonization but also to improved air quality,

public health, and economic resilience. Nonetheless, a range of technical, financial, and

regulatory barriers remains. These include fragmented governance, uneven infrastructure

development, and low levels of user acceptance in some cities.

Figure 1: Overview of the work performed

The report identifies and analyses five high-impact e-mobility solutions selected for their

replicability, maturity, and strategic relevance:

1. Public charging infrastructure (PCI): Vital for enabling EV adoption at scale, especially

in residential areas lacking off-street parking.

2. Electric bus systems: A robust lever for decarbonising urban public transport fleets aligned

with EU clean transport targets.

3. Last-mile urban logistics: Addresses freight-related emissions and congestion through

low-emission zones and electric delivery fleets.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

4. Vehicle-sharing systems: Offer flexible mobility options and reduce car dependency,

particularly in dense urban zones.

5. Vehicle-to-grid (V2G)/bidirectional charging: An emerging technology linking mobility

with energy transition by allowing EVs to support grid stability.

The outcome of this work is a Set of

Guidelines for city practitioners,

designed as a practical shortcut for local

authorities seeking to implement and

scale e-mobility solutions. These

guidelines were created in direct response

to city needs, and this does not represent

another conceptual report, but is a usable

tool offering replicable models,

diagnostic support, risk assessment

tools, and real-life references. The

goal is to help city officers move

efficiently from ambition to

implementation by lowering entry

barriers and providing step-by-step

assistance tailored to a variety of local

contexts.

The guidelines are structured in three

interconnected parts. First, a six-step

methodology provides a sequential

roadmap—from diagnosing barriers to

monitoring impact—that cities can follow when deploying e-mobility solutions. Second, a Barrier

Assessment Tool (e-BAT) helps cities evaluate their local readiness and challenges across

technical, financial, regulatory, and social dimensions. Third, solution-specific factsheets present

detailed, ready-to-use templates for five key interventions: Public charging infrastructure, Electric

bus systems, Last-mile urban logistics, Vehicle-sharing systems, and Vehicle-to-grid technologies.

These modules are grounded in case studies and real examples from cities at different maturity

levels, enabling both early adopters and more advanced cities to find relevant entry points.

Ultimately, this study reinforces the recognition that scaling e-mobility is not just a technical

challenge—it is a systemic transformation that requires new forms of governance, cross-sector

coordination, and user-centric design. With the right tools and shared strategies, cities can

accelerate the shift to sustainable urban mobility across Europe.

Figure 2: Roadmap’s 6 step methodology

Replicating e-mobility solutions

1. Introduction

Scope of the study

This study is a response to a short-term study that focused on e-mobility solutions based on the

experiences of the SCC Lighthouse Cities and Fellow Cities within the 20 Smart Cities and

Communities. The need arose from several intertwined challenges that hinder the large-scale

adoption and replication of e-mobility solutions across Europe. Cities are under increasing pressure

to manage the complex interactions between stakeholders—energy suppliers, charging station

operators, users, and service providers—yet the lack of coordination between these diverse systems

limits the efficiency of e-mobility networks. Moreover, the uptake of smart and bidirectional vehicle

recharging remains insufficient. Importantly, even e-mobility offers a vital solution and enables zero-

emission mobility, it at the same time puts a strain on electricity grids.

Moreover, disparities in infrastructure across cities, from uneven access to charging stations to

fragmented data systems, create further obstacles to scaling successful solutions. Rural areas, in

particular, lag in terms of access to reliable charging infrastructure, exacerbating inequities in e-

mobility adoption. Economic uncertainties also deter key stakeholders from investing in new

technologies, while fragmented policy environments across Europe hinder cross-border

collaboration. These challenges, coupled with the urgent need to meet decarbonization targets,

highlight the urgency for this study to provide a roadmap for overcoming barriers and

successfully replicating e-mobility innovations.

Our selected experts bring complementary skills to tackle these challenges and upscale e-mobility

solutions. The approaches include studying the market dynamic and conditions as well as

understanding the business models and infrastructure (lead by Fernando Velázquez);

comprehending mobility systems, implementation barriers and innovation, together with a deep

knowledge of EU projects and scientific rigor (co-lead by Florian Herrmann and Gregorio Fernandez);

and fully grasping urban policies (led by Alexander Schmidt). This combination ensures a holistic

effort to overcome barriers and scale e-mobility solutions across Europe.

Figure 3: Project management and coordination (under a Triple Helix Approach)

2.Case studies multicriteria

analysis and evaluation 3.Report of findings and

validation

Interviews

Cities'

needs

Barriers

Busin

ess

model

Mobility

initiatives

Key market

factors and

conditions

Regulations

Guidelines for

practitioners

working for

cities

1.State of the Art

Replicating e-mobility solutions

2. State-of-the-art

The transition to electric mobility stands as a pivotal element in Europe's pursuit of sustainable

development. Central to this endeavour is the European Green Deal [1] . It aims for a 90% reduction

in transport-related greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, acknowledging the transport sector's

significant contribution to air pollution and CO₂ emissions [2] .

Beyond environmental objectives, the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) offers substantial public

health benefits [3] . By reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOₓ) and particulate matter (PM),

EVs can significantly improve air quality in urban areas. This leads to better health outcomes and

decreased healthcare costs associated with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.

From an economic standpoint, the shift to e-mobility enhances energy security by diversifying energy

sources and reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels [4] . It also stimulates economic growth by

developing industries related to EVs, including battery production, charging infrastructure, and

digital mobility services, all of which foster innovation and create jobs.

Embracing electric mobility also positions Europe as a leader in technological innovation [5] .

Investments in advanced battery technologies, smart grid integration, and new business models not

only support the e-mobility revolution but also reinforce Europe's global competitiveness in the

evolving transportation landscape.

Given these drivers, an in-depth understanding of the current e-mobility landscape is vital. This

state-of-the-art review introduces this final report by offering a comprehensive look at existing

solutions, technologies, policy measures, and market conditions. By mapping out where Europe

stands in terms of infrastructure, technological innovation, and regulatory frameworks, the study

provides a solid foundation for identifying pathways to scale and replicate successful e-mobility

initiatives.

Despite considerable progress and the importance of change into electric mobility, however, several

factors continue to hinder the widespread adoption of electric vehicles. These key limiting factors—

whether they be technical, economic, social, or policy-related—must be examined to understand

why certain regions or stakeholder groups lag behind. This state-of-the art chapter, therefore, starts

by identifying and exploring these barriers. The targeted approach of the report pinpoints actionable

strategies that can overcome existing challenges, accelerate the transition to e-mobility, and

ultimately contribute to Europe’s broader sustainability and decarbonization goals.

The widespread adoption of EVs faces several technical challenges that hinder their integration

into mainstream transportation. A significant concern is the lack of a comprehensive and reliable

charging infrastructure, especially in rural or remote areas. This leads to range anxiety among

potential users. The insufficient availability of fast or ultra-fast charging stations exacerbates this

issue, limiting the practicality of EVs for long-distance travel [6] . Additionally, local electricity grids

may struggle to accommodate the increased demand from simultaneous charging of multiple

vehicles, potentially leading to grid instability. The limited implementation of smart charging and

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies further hampers optimising grid load and effectively integrating

renewable energy sources. On the technological front, high battery costs [7] , restricted driving

ranges, and prolonged charging times remain significant deterrents for consumers. Moreover, the

dependence on critical raw materials such as lithium and cobalt raises concerns regarding supply

chain sustainability and environmental impact.

The widespread adoption of EVs is limited by several economic and financial barriers [8] . A primary

concern is the high upfront cost associated with EVs, which frequently exceeds that of traditional

internal combustion engine vehicles. This price disparity is a major limiting factor for many

consumers, particularly in regions where financial incentives are limited or inconsistent. The

availability and structure of subsidies, tax breaks, and grants vary greatly across different countries

and regions. The result is an uneven playing field that undermines consumer and investor

Replicating e-mobility solutions

confidence. Furthermore, the lack of accessible financing options exacerbates this issue, making it

challenging for individuals and fleet operators to invest in EV technology. In addition to vehicle costs,

the financing of charging infrastructure presents another significant hurdle. Projects designed to

expand charging networks, especially in low-density or less affluent areas, often struggle to attract

the necessary investment. While emerging financial tools such as green bonds and crowdfunding

have the potential to support these initiatives, they are not yet standardised or widely adopted,

further hindering progress in infrastructure development.

Adoption of EVs on a large scale is significantly influenced by social and behavioural dynamics

that shape consumer attitudes and decision-making. A primary concern is range anxiety. [9] , where

potential users fear that EVs may not have sufficient range or that accessible charging points are

lacking. This leads to apprehension about being stranded. This anxiety is aggravated by persisting

misconceptions regarding EV performance, safety, and the total cost of ownership. This is

accompanied by a notable gap in awareness and education because many consumers have limited

knowledge about the environmental and financial benefits of EVs. The gap is further widened by

inadequate training or information provided by car dealerships and public authorities, hindering

informed decision-making. Finally, resistance to change plays a significant role: long-standing habits

favouring internal combustion engine vehicles make consumers hesitant to switch to newer, less

familiar technology. Collectively, these social and behavioural barriers contribute to the slow uptake

of EVs, despite their potential benefits.

The expansion of EVs in Europe faces several legal and policy challenges that hinder their

widespread adoption. [9] . A significant issue is the fragmentation of regulatory frameworks across

European Union (EU) member states. [11] . Variations in incentives, charging infrastructure

regulations, and grid integration policies complicate cross-border EV usage and create an uneven

playing field for manufacturers and consumers alike. For instance, differences in building codes and

urban planning laws can delay the deployment of large-scale charging stations, impeding

infrastructure development. Additionally, uncertainty in long-term policy support poses a challenge;

shifting political priorities and short election cycles may lead to the rollback of incentives or changes

in regulations. This undermines consumer and investor confidence. Such a lack of robust, consistent

planning discourages the industry from committing to the long-term investments necessary for EV

advancement. Furthermore, the absence of standardisation and interoperability in technical

standards—such as charging connectors, payment methods, and data protocols—hinders seamless

EV travel across regions. This inconveniences users and limits the efficiency of charging networks.

Addressing these challenges requires harmonised policies and collaborative efforts among EU

member states to establish a cohesive and supportive environment for electric mobility.

In the European context, the quantity of public charging stations experienced an increase exceeding

35% in 2024 relative to 2023, yielding a total that surpassed 1 million [12] . Figure 4 shows the

evolution of the global stock of public charging points by region. Nevertheless, the marked disparities

among various nations reflect divergent rates of electric vehicle adoption and the slow evolution of

charging infrastructure. Within the European Union, 11 out of 27 member states reported a more

than 50% increase in public charging stations in 2024, versus 2023. By late 2024, the Netherlands

boasted the most extensive national charging network in Europe, comprising over 180,000 public

charging stations, followed by Germany (160,000) and France (155,000).

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Figure 4: Global stock of public charging points by region, 2018-2024 [13]

Adopting electric vehicles at scale presents a range of practical implementation challenges that

are especially pronounced in densely populated urban areas. Residents without private driveways or

dedicated parking spaces encounter significant obstacles to home charging. They must often rely on

public charging infrastructure that may be inconveniently located or require multiple subscriptions

and payment methods, complicating the charging process. For commercial fleets, integrating EVs

introduces operational complexities, especially in route planning and charging logistics. Fleet

managers must adapt to new tools and acquire expertise to effectively incorporate EVs into existing

fleet management systems. Additionally, specialised maintenance and repair services for EVs are

less prevalent than those for traditional internal combustion engine vehicles. This leads to potential

delays and higher costs for EV owners seeking after-sales service. Addressing these challenges is

crucial to facilitate the broader adoption of electric vehicles and ensure a smooth transition to

sustainable transportation.

Reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) and decrease in local air pollutants

associated with the electrification of transport:

The transition from the current mobility model to a more sustainable one is not only a technological

commitment but also an environmental, health, and future necessity reflected in the

European regulatory framework. The European Green Deal, adopted in 2019, establishes the

European Union's commitment to achieving climate and emissions neutrality by 2050. It establishes

the decarbonization of transport as one of its fundamental pillars, given that transport accounts for

nearly 25% of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe. Progressive electrification is becoming a political

and environmental imperative.

This commitment is embodied in the "Fit for 55" legislative package, which establishes an

intermediate target of reducing emissions by 55% by 2030. This package includes a ban on the sale

Replicating e-mobility solutions

of new vehicles with internal combustion engines starting in 2035, as well as emissions reductions

for vehicle manufacturers. In parallel, the new Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR)

establishes binding obligations for Member States regarding the deployment of charging

infrastructure. It guarantees electric charging stations every 60 km along major European corridors

by 2025. These measures pursue a two-fold aim: to boost demand for electric vehicles and to

guarantee the infrastructure necessary for their widespread adoption.

Note here also that the CO₂ emissions regulation for light-duty vehicles (Regulation EU 2019/631)

imposes increasingly stringent limits on manufacturers. This acts as an accelerator for the

electrification of the European vehicle fleet. This entire regulatory framework is supported by

financial instruments such as the Next Generation EU and Horizon Europe funds, which promote the

innovation and deployment of clean technologies.

Electric mobility represents a key tool for reducing the environmental impact of the transport sector,

in line with the climate and air quality goals established by the European Union. Nevertheless,

properly assessing its contribution to sustainability requires adopting a broad perspective that

considers a range of issues beyond emissions during vehicle use to include aspects such as energy

production, battery manufacturing, and the international transport of EVs.

Based on this approach, the environmental analysis is structured around three main dimensions: (i)

greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction and reduction of local air pollutants, (ii) EV lifecycle assessment,

and (iii) the impacts related to their global production and logistics. These four axes help to more

precisely identify the real benefits of electromobility along with the remaining challenges to ensure

an energy transition that is truly clean, equitable, and sustainable.

The transition from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles to electric vehicles significantly

reduces GHG emissions. According to a study by the European Environment Agency, EVs emit

between 17% and 30% less CO₂ over their life cycle compared to gasoline or diesel vehicles (the

EURO standard used as baseline[14] ). This difference widens in countries with a high proportion of

renewable energy in their electricity mix.

A quick comparison reveals the differences associated with the three common types of vehicles in

European cities that will be the focus of electrification efforts:

Vehicle Type

ICE CO₂ Emissions (g/km)

EV CO₂ Emissions (g/km)

Passenger Car

120

Van

180

City Bus

900

400

Note: These values are approximate and may vary depending on the specific model and operating

conditions.

The actual environmental impact of EVs depends largely on the composition of the national electricity

mix, that is, the technologies used to generate the electricity that powers these vehicles. Although

EVs do not produce local emissions during use, they do generate indirect emissions if the electricity

comes from fossil fuels. Accordingly, the climate benefit of electric mobility is greater the cleaner

the electricity that is used to charge them.

Countries such as Sweden have a particularly favourable profile because their electricity mix is

composed primarily of hydropower (approximately 40%), nuclear power (30–35%), and a growing

proportion of wind power. This translates into very low emissions per kWh (below 10 gCO₂/kWh),

making EVs a nearly carbon-neutral solution during use. In contrast, countries such as Poland, which

Replicating e-mobility solutions

rely heavily on coal and natural gas for electricity generation, have emissions of around 600

gCO₂/kWh. This significantly reduces the positive impact of EVs on the climate. The chart below

highlights the trend in national electricity mix emissions since 1990 in four countries that represent

this variability [15] :

Country

1990

2000

2010

2023

Poland

1293

916

848

614

Spain

449

467

257

158

France

205

Sweden

For comparison, an EV with an average energy consumption [16] is estimated to emit approximately:

▪ Sweden: 1.52 gCO₂/km

▪ France: 9.50 gCO₂/km

▪ Spain: 30.02 gCO₂/km

▪ Poland: 116.66 gCO₂/km

These values clearly illustrate how the environmental benefits of electric vehicles depend largely on

the national electricity mix: very favourable in Sweden and France, more limited (although still

positive compared to combustion engines) in Poland.

EV Life Cycle Assessment:

The life cycle assessment (LCA) of electric vehicles, considering all stages from raw material

extraction to final recycling (Cradle to Cradle), is essential to understanding their full environmental

impact. For example, using the IEA calculator [17] An average gasoline-powered car with an average

daily travel of 42 km will generate emissions of 54.1 t of CO₂ eq over its 15-year life cycle. An

equivalent plug-in hybrid electric vehicle, meanwhile, would produce 36.9 t, 32% less over its

lifetime. Finally, a battery electric vehicle in the same segment with a range of 300 km would produce

25.0 t. This is 54% less over its lifetime than a conventional internal combustion vehicle and 32%

less than an equivalent plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Despite the higher emissions associated with

battery manufacturing, the cumulative emissions of the battery electric vehicle are lower than those

of its internal combustion equivalent after two years.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Figure 5: Comparison of lifetime emissions of internal combustion, hybrid, and electric

vehicles in the same category. Source: IEA EV Life Cycle Assessment Calculator

Impact derived from electric vehicles and battery production outside the

European Union:

The global rise of electromobility is reshaping the transportation sector, with electric vehicles (EVs)

playing a central role in the shift towards a more sustainable, low-carbon future. This transformation,

particularly in Europe, is expected to lead to substantial growth in the demand for both electric cars

and buses, as well as the batteries that power them. The transition to EVs encompasses a wide

range of vehicles, from private cars to public transport options, with each contributing significantly

to emissions reductions, cleaner air, and the decarbonisation of the transportation sector. However,

the rapid scale-up of EV adoption raises new challenges, particularly in the context of the supply

chains that are responsible for producing both the vehicles and their batteries.

A major concern lies in the current reliance on production outside the European Union, especially in

China. This situation presents a complex challenge for the EU as it seeks to balance its ambitious

environmental objectives—such as meeting emissions reduction targets and fostering a green

economy—with the social and economic risks tied to these global supply chains. The European

Commission has acknowledged the risks associated with such dependency, and efforts are underway

to diversify and strengthen domestic production capacities. However, this transition remains slow,

and the dependence on non-EU countries, particularly for critical materials and manufacturing

processes, continues to pose a significant hurdle.

In 2023, China accounted for 77% of global electric bus production and 82% of battery

manufacturing, including crucial stages such as materials processing and the production of battery

components, including anodes, cathodes, and separators. As shown in Figure 6, this concentration

of the bus manufacturing value chain in China underscores the complexity of the global supply chain

for electric buses, which continues to impact the European Union's efforts to localise its production

and reduce dependence on foreign markets. Figure 6 illustrates the concentration of the bus

manufacturing value chain in China [18] :

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Figure 6: The value chain in the production of batteries and electric buses and its

distribution by region

The high concentration of the value chain in high-risk countries in terms of sustainability or even

labour rights has led some European countries to introduce more strict procurement criteria for

public transport technologies. This could lead to the exclusion of vehicles manufactured, in whole or

in part, in these countries. This would generate tensions in the supply of electric buses, increase

costs (up to 40% more for buses manufactured in Europe), and slow down the electrification process

in transport.

Importantly, the international transport of these vehicles from distant countries carries an additional

climate impact that cannot be ignored. In this context, promoting local bus manufacturing and

strengthening European battery production (currently very limited, especially in technologies such

as LFP) is key to moving toward electromobility aligned with climate goals and the principles of social

and economic sustainability established within the framework of the European Green Deal and the

new EU battery regulations (Regulation EU 2023/1542).

Replicating e-mobility solutions

2.1 Scientific literature: technical innovation

The following sections provide the results of an in-depth analysis of those state-of-the-art technical

innovations and policy measures that can have the greatest effect on these limiting aspects, thus

facilitating a wide and sustainable diffusion of electromobility.

To reduce the effect of the above key factors limiting the widespread adoption of EVs in Europe,

several technical advances, such as smart charging, Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technology, and battery

advances, are proposed below. For each set of constraints, such as technical or economic factors, a

few technical solutions are proposed, and their potential impact on the main constraints on the EV

spread is then analysed.

Technical limitations

Charging

infrastructure

gaps

Solution: Smart charging networks, ultra-fast charging technology, and

dynamic load balancing can optimise charging station availability and reduce

range anxiety.

Impact: Enhances charging speed, reliability and accessibility.

Grid

integration

and capacity

Solution: Smart charging, bidirectional charging (V2G), and grid-responsive

demand management can optimise energy distribution, preventing grid

overloads.

Impact: Enables large-scale EV adoption without requiring massive grid

reinforcements.

Battery

technology

constraints

Solution: Advances in solid-state batteries, higher energy density batteries

and faster charging batteries (e.g., silicon-anode or lithium-sulphur

batteries).

Impact: Extends range, reduces charging time, and lowers battery costs.

Economic and financial barriers

High upfront

costs

Solution: Battery cost reduction through economies of scale and new battery

chemistries (e.g., cobalt-free batteries) and battery lifespan extension

through 2nd/3rd life utilisation

Impact: Makes EVs more price-competitive with internal combustion engine

vehicles.

Financing

infrastructure

for charging

networks

Solution: Smart charging business models (e.g., subscription-based charging,

dynamic pricing, and private-public partnerships) to reduce financial risk.

Impact: Attracts investment into infrastructure expansion.

Social and behavioural factors

Range anxiety

and

perception

Solution: Battery improvements (higher capacity and faster charging). Smart

navigation and charging apps that guide users to available chargers in real-

time. Bidirectional charging (V2G) allows users to use their EVs as backup

power sources.

Impact: Reduces driver concerns about running out of charge.

Awareness

and education

gaps

Solution: Smart dashboards and real-time EV efficiency monitoring help users

understand charging habits. Automated home-charging systems optimise

charging costs based on electricity tariffs.

Impact: Increases user confidence and engagement with EVs.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Legal and policy challenges

Standardization

and

interoperability

Solution: Universal charging standards (ISO 15118, Plug & Charge, CCS,

CHAdeMO) to ensure cross-network compatibility. Smart charging protocols

to allow seamless payment and access across charging providers.

Impact: Simplifies user experience and facilitates cross-border EV travel.

Practical implementation issues

Parking and

charging

accessibility

Solution: Wireless (inductive) charging to facilitate charging in urban

environments. Smart shared charging points to maximise charging

infrastructure use in high-density areas.

Impact: Expands access to EV charging for users without private garages.

Operational

complexity of

fleets

Solution: AI-powered fleet management tools to optimise charging

schedules. V2G integration for fleet energy cost reduction.

Impact: Makes EV fleets more efficient and financially viable.

Maintenance

and after-sales

service

Solution: Predictive AI-driven diagnostics for early detection of battery and

motor issues. Standardised modular battery packs to reduce maintenance

complexity.

Impact: Improves the longevity and reliability of EV components.

Technological improvements in smart charging, V2G, battery advancements, and AI-driven solutions

can directly address many barriers hindering EV adoption, particularly in infrastructure, cost, grid

integration, and user perception. The following sections analyse improvements in these points, with

a special focus on the work carried out in Scalable cities projects.

2.1.1 Smart charging

Smart charging refers to the optimised management of the electric vehicle (EV) charging process

and involves adapting the consumption of charging facilities to the state of the electrical grid. This

approach allows charging processes to be adjusted based on real-time data such as grid demand,

electricity prices, or the availability of renewable energy sources. This reduces pressure on the

electrical grid, increases the flexibility of the charging process, and improves integration of electric

vehicles into the energy system [19] .

The implementation of smart charging infrastructure transforms EVs into flexible energy resources

capable of providing auxiliary or support services to the grid during emergencies, thereby actively

contributing to its stability. For example, by incentivising users to charge their vehicles during hours

of low demand or when renewable energy production is high, smart charging enables a more efficient

management of electricity flows and helps avoid grid congestion [20] .

The benefits of this technology include improved grid stability and load management [21] [22] . By

scheduling charging during off-peak hours, smart charging helps lower peak demand, reducing the

need for costly electrical infrastructure expansions. It also alleviates grid congestion and reduces

charging costs.

From an economic perspective, consumers can save significantly by optimising charging during times

when electricity rates are lower. Furthermore, efficient charging management postpones or even

avoids immediate investments in grid expansion, which is an economic benefit for system operators.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Environmentally, smart charging maximises the use of renewable energy by synchronising EV

charging with peak renewable generation times. This helps reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Accordingly, encouraging greater adoption of electric vehicles accompanied by smart charging

practices substantially reduces greenhouse gas emissions and improves air quality.

Integrating advanced strategies such as dynamic load balancing, grid-responsive demand

management, and automated home charging systems into smart charging infrastructure significantly

enhances the efficiency and sustainability of EV adoption:

■ Dynamic Load Balancing involves the real-time distribution of available electrical capacity

among multiple charging stations, ensuring optimal utilisation without overloading the grid.

This method adjusts power allocation based on current demand and grid conditions, thereby

maintaining system stability and preventing potential bottlenecks.

■ Grid-Responsive Demand Management [24] aligns EV charging activities with fluctuations in

energy supply and demand. By responding to grid signals, charging can be scheduled during

periods of low demand or high renewable energy generation. This effectively reduces peak

loads and enhances the integration of sustainable energy sources.

■ Automated Home Charging Systems utilise dynamic electricity tariffs to optimise charging

schedules. This enables EV owners to charge their vehicles when energy prices are lowest.

This not only reduces individual charging costs but also contributes to overall grid efficiency

by smoothing demand patterns.

Smart charging solutions offer a good approach to addressing the challenges associated with EV

integration into existing power systems, enhancing grid stability, promoting economic benefits, and

supporting environmental sustainability. They play a pivotal role in accelerating the widespread

adoption of electric vehicles in both urban and rural settings.

2.1.2 Smart charging networks

Smart charging networks are advanced systems that manage the distribution of electrical power to

EVs in an efficient and sustainable manner. ´This involves utilising real-time data, communication

technologies, and artificial intelligence (AI). A key component of these networks is the integration

of AI-powered fleet management tools. Such tools analyse vast amounts of data from vehicle

telematics, traffic patterns, and energy prices to optimise charging schedules. By processing this

information, AI-driven systems can make informed decisions about when and where to charge each

vehicle. This ensures minimal disruption to operations, reduces energy costs, and aligns charging

with grid conditions and renewable energy availability. These technologies enhance fleet efficiency

while simultaneously reducing grid strain and improving energy use.

Examples of AI-powered fleet management solutions:

■ Ampcontrol: This software offers seamless telematics integration, real-time charger

monitoring, and 24/7 support, enabling fleet operators to reduce EV charger downtime and

optimise charging schedules. (ampcontrol.io)

■ Synop's charging management software allows monitoring, scheduling, and optimisation of

charging across commercial EV fleets. It is compatible with various chargers, including Level

2 AC and DC fast chargers, providing flexibility for diverse fleet needs. (synop.ai)

■ IFS: IFS's AI-powered workforce planning and scheduling solution incorporates charge and

capacity planning, optimising EV operations by considering factors such as charger locations,

types, capacities, and charging speeds. (ifs.com)

2.1.3 Vehicle-to-grid (V2G)

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technology enables EVs both to extract power from the electrical grid and to

supply stored energy back to it. This bidirectional flow allows EVs to function as mobile energy

storage units, contributing to grid stability and efficiency. By discharging electricity during peak

demand periods or when renewable energy generation is low, V2G systems can reduce the strain on

Replicating e-mobility solutions

the grid and help integrate renewable energy sources. This capability is beneficial in both urban and

rural settings, where energy demands and grid capacities can vary significantly.

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies offer many benefits for the energy system and EV users. First, it

contributes to grid stability and peak demand shaving. This allows EVs to return energy to the grid

during times of high demand, helping to balance supply and demand. Furthermore, V2G techniques

help integrate renewable energy, allowing surplus solar or wind energy to be stored and returned to

the grid when production reduces. The result is a more sustainable energy framework. It also

provides economic incentives to EV owners, who can receive economic compensation for the energy

they supply to the grid. Finally, in the event of grid failures, V2G-enabled EVs can act as backup

power sources for homes or critical infrastructure, improving energy resilience in both urban and

rural settings.

2.1.4 Ultra-fast charging technology and low grid impact charge

points

Ultra-fast charging (UFC) stations are designed to reduce electric vehicle charging times, providing

high power levels and enhancing the convenience and feasibility of EVs for long-distance travel.

These stations typically provide power outputs ranging from 350 kilowatts (kW) up to 1 megawatt

(MW) per vehicle, enabling fast energy charge [25] .

The most common power levels for public DC fast charging stations have evolved in recent years.

In 2019, the majority worked at 50 kW or lower. Between 2021 and 2023, however, many new

installations were equipped with higher power outputs, with 250 kW and 350 kW becoming more

prevalent [27] .

To mitigate the impact of high-power charging on the electrical grid, low-grid-impact charge points

are being developed. These systems often incorporate energy storage solutions such as batteries to

buffer the impact on the grid. Storing energy in periods of low demand or when renewable energy

generation is high, these charge points can supply power to EVs during peak times without imposing

excessive strain on the grid infrastructure [28] .

Advancing and deploying ultra-fast charging stations, alongside developing low-grid-impact charge

stations, are critical steps toward promoting the widespread adoption of electric vehicles.

2.1.5 Smart navigation and charging apps

Smart navigation and charging applications are digital tools designed to enhance the EV ownership

experience by integrating route planning with real-time charging station data. These applications

support drivers in locating available charging stations, monitoring charging sessions, and managing

payment. This helps address common concerns such as range anxiety and charging accessibility. By

providing up-to-date information on charging station locations, availability, and compatibility, these

apps enable efficient trip planning and seamless integration of charging into daily routines [29] .

2.1.6 Procedures to allow seamless payment and access across

charging providers.

Facilitating seamless access and payment across diverse EV charging networks calls for adopting

standardised protocols and interoperability agreements. These mechanisms enable EV drivers to

utilise charging stations from various providers without the need for multiple subscriptions or

payment methods, akin to mobile phone roaming services.

EV roaming allows drivers to charge their vehicles across different networks using a single

authentication method. This interoperability is achieved through roaming agreements between

Replicating e-mobility solutions

charging point operators (CPOs) and e-mobility service providers (eMSPs) and is facilitated by

standardised communication protocols. Key protocols include:

■ Open Charge Point Interface (OCPI): Enables real-time exchange of information between

CPOs and eMSPs, covering aspects such as charge point availability, pricing, and

authentication.

■ Open InterCharge Protocol (OICP): Facilitates data exchange for e-roaming between

different market participants, ensuring that EV drivers can access various charging networks

seamlessly.

■ Open Clearing House Protocol (OCHP): Supports interoperability by allowing different

charging networks to communicate, enabling unified access for EV users.

These protocols ensure that EV drivers can locate, access, and pay for charging services across

multiple networks with a single user account. This enhances the convenience and accessibility of EV

charging infrastructure.

Roaming hubs act as intermediaries that connect various CPOs and eMSPs, thereby streamlining the

process of interoperability. By serving as a central platform, roaming hubs reduce the complexity of

establishing individual agreements between multiple service providers. This centralised approach

simplifies the user experience and allows drivers to access a wide range of charging stations through

a single platform.

An emerging solution to enhance user convenience is the ISO 15118 standard's "Plug & Charge"

feature. This technology enables automatic authentication and billing when an EV is connected to a

compatible charging station. This eliminates the need for manual intervention or multiple service

subscriptions. Upon plugging in, the vehicle and charging station securely exchange credentials,

streamlining the charging process.

The widespread implementation of these protocols and technologies is pivotal in promoting the

extensive adoption of electromobility. Simplifying the charging process and ensuring seamless

access across diverse charging infrastructures addresses critical barriers to EV integration in both

urban and rural settings.

2.1.7 Wireless (inductive) charging

Wireless charging, also known as inductive charging, is a technology that enables the transfer of

electrical energy to electric vehicles without the need for physical connectors or wires. This system

uses electromagnetic fields to transmit energy between a charging pad installed on the ground and

a receiving coil located in the vehicle. Charging can be carried out both when the vehicle is parked

(static charging) and while in motion (dynamic charging). This offers a convenient and automated

alternative to traditional plug-in charging methods.

Among the main benefits of this technology are the convenience and safety it provides. It eliminates

the need to manually plug in the vehicle, reduces wear on the connectors, and minimises exposure

to environmental elements. This contactless system also reduces the risk of electric shock and allows

charging in adverse weather conditions. Furthermore, dynamic charging could help reduce battery

size because vehicles can recharge while in motion. This would reduce overall vehicle weight and

potentially lower manufacturing costs. For commercial fleets and public transport, wireless charging

can improve operational efficiency by reducing charging-related downtime, allowing vehicles to

recharge opportunistically during stops or journeys.

Note, however, that this technology also faces significant challenges. The infrastructure cost,

especially for dynamic systems that require installing coils on roads, requires a considerable

investment. This limits large-scale deployment. Furthermore, the energy efficiency of wireless

systems is still lower compared to wired charging due to transmission losses. This technical barrier

Replicating e-mobility solutions

still requires research solutions. Another challenge is the lack of universal standards that ensure

compatibility between different vehicles and charging infrastructures, which impedes interoperability

and can hinder the confidence of users and manufacturers.

2.1.8 Standardisation of charging protocols

Standardisation of charging protocols refers to the development and implementation of uniform

technical specifications and communication protocols for electric vehicle charging infrastructure. This

standardisation ensures compatibility and interoperability between EVs and charging stations,

regardless of manufacturer or service provider, which facilitates a seamless and user-friendly

charging experience. The main benefits of standardisation are interoperability among devices from

different manufacturers, better user experience, simplifying the charging process, and better and

cheaper infrastructure development.

Common EV charging standards and protocols:

■ IEC 62196: This international standard defines the types of connectors and inlets used for

conductive charging of EVs.

■ IEC 61851: This standard outlines the requirements for EV conductive charging systems,

covering aspects such as charging modes, communication protocols, and safety features. It

serves as a foundational framework for the design and operation of charging infrastructure.

■ ISO 15118: This standard specifies the communication interface between EVs and charging

stations. This enables advanced functionalities such as "Plug and Charge" for automatic

authentication and billing and supports bidirectional energy transfer in Vehicle-to-grid (V2G)

applications.

■ Open Charge Point Protocol (OCPP): OCPP is an open-source communication protocol that

facilitates interoperability between charging stations and central management systems. It

allows for remote monitoring, control, and integration of charging infrastructure from

different vendors into a unified network.

■ CHAdeMO: Originating in Japan, CHAdeMO is a fast-charging standard that defines a specific

connector and communication protocol for high-power DC charging, enabling rapid energy

transfer to compatible EVs.

■ Combined Charging System (CCS): CCS combines AC and DC charging capabilities into a

single connector design, supporting various power levels and providing flexibility for different

charging scenarios. It is widely adopted in Europe and North America.

The adoption of these standardised protocols is crucial for the cohesive development of EV charging

ecosystems, ensuring that infrastructure investments are future-proof and universally accessible.

2.1.9 Battery advancements

Advances in battery technology are essential for the ultimate adoption of electric vehicles because

they directly influence key aspects such as range, cost, and sustainability. These improvements

range from innovations in battery chemistry to new manufacturing processes and advanced

management systems, all aimed at increasing energy density, reducing costs, and improving overall

system efficiency [30] .

One of the most significant benefits of these advances is the extension of vehicle ranges, thanks to

greater energy density, which helps mitigate the range anxiety that persists among many users.

Furthermore, battery costs have decreased significantly over the past 15 years—by nearly 90%—

due mainly to technological innovations and the economies of scale achieved through mass

production [31] . In parallel, performance and safety will further improve, especially with the current

development of solid-state batteries, which offer greater thermal stability, faster charging times,

and a lower risk of fire compared to traditional lithium-ion batteries [32] .

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Nonetheless, significant challenges remain. Lithium-ion battery production depends on critical

materials such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, whose availability is limited and whose markets are

highly volatile. Added to this is the urgent need to develop effective recycling systems to manage

the end of battery life, thereby reducing their environmental impact [33] .

The sharp decline in battery prices also reflects the development of alternative materials such as

lithium iron phosphate (LFP) or sodium-ion chemistries. These also help reduce the dependence on

scarce resources. In parallel, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into battery management

systems enables predictive analysis of system status. Here, potential failures are detected based on

usage patterns, and proactive maintenance is facilitated, increasing vehicle reliability and lifespan

[34] .

Finally, the use of standardised modular designs simplifies maintenance tasks by simplifying the

replacement of individual modules without having to replace the entire battery. This standardisation

across manufacturers not only optimises production and maintenance but also promotes recycling

processes at the end of a vehicle's lifespan [35] .

2.1.10 State-of-the-art examples in scalable cities’ projects

This section compares the advancements in the state-of-the-art described in previous sections with

the Lighthouse cities of the scalable cities’ projects. The first conclusion observed, in relation to

mobility, is that beyond the electrification of fleets (whether buses, delivery vehicles, or various

types of public vehicles), the most tested technologies are the development of hubs for EV charging.

These involve varying degrees of smart or controlled/managed charging, sometimes incorporating

fast chargers, V2G (Vehicle-to-grid) technology trials, as well as the development of apps and

platforms for EV charge management, vehicle sharing, intramodality in transport, and infrastructure

monitoring. In general, these projects do not focus on efforts related to battery development,

standardisation, or inductive charging. The following table summarises this analysis.

Table 1: The most relevant tested technologies in the 20 SCC projects

Lighthouse project

Smart

charging

V2G

Ultra-fast

charger

Smart

navigation and

apps

REMOURBAN

Yes

Triangulum

Yes

Growsmarter

Yes

SmartEnCity

Yes

Replicate

Yes

Smarter Together

SharingCities

Yes

RUGGEDISED

Yes

MySmartLife

Yes

MatchUp

Yes

Stardust

Yes

+CityxChange

Yes

IRIS – Smart Cities

Yes

MAKING-CITY

SPARCS

Yes

POCITYF

Yes

ATELIER

RESPONSE

Yes

ASCEND

Yes

NEUTRALPATH

Yes

Replicating e-mobility solutions

2.2 Grey literature: Policy measures

2.2.1 Policy frameworks supporting e-mobility in cities

European cities have leveraged a multi-level policy framework (from EU directives and funding to

local strategies and incentives) to accelerate e-mobility adoption. Since the launch of the European

Smart Cities and Communities program around 2012, dozens of city projects (often EU-funded

“Lighthouse” projects) have piloted electric mobility solutions and informed new policies. Key

elements of supportive policy frameworks include:

1. European Union directives and funding

2. Integration into city mobility plans

3. Example policies:

a. Reserved parking and charging access

b. Access to restricted zones

c. Use of bus and priority lanes

d. Public awareness and incentivised demonstrations

e. Targeted incentives for businesses

f. Integration in city MaaS apps

g. EV purchase co-funding for taxi and logistics sectors

4. Public fleet electrification commitments

5. Public-private partnerships and stakeholder engagement

European Union directives and funding

The EU provides both mandates and money to drive urban e-mobility. For example, the revised

Clean Vehicles Directive (2019) requires public authorities to procure minimum quotas of low- or

zero-emission vehicles. In major Member States such as Germany, France, and Italy, at least 45%

of new buses purchased in 2021–2025 must be “clean” (e.g. electric, hydrogen, or alternative fuel),

rising to 65% for 2026–2030. Similarly, EU CO₂ standards for vehicles will effectively ban sales of

new fossil-fuel cars by 2035, mandating 100% zero-emission new car and van sales. These higher-

level rules push manufacturers and transit operators to offer more electric options, making it easier

for cities to go electric. Crucially, the EU and national governments have backed e-mobility with

funding – including Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe grants for smart city pilots, as well as recovery

funds (e.g. NextGenerationEU) to co-finance electric bus fleets and charging infrastructure. For

instance, Milan’s transit agency, ATM, has secured over 300M€ (including EU funds) to purchase 550

e-buses and upgrade depots as part of its plan for a 100% electric bus fleet by 2030 [36] . Such

funding and EU-level commitments create a supportive environment and reduce financial barriers

for city e-mobility projects.

The Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive (AFID) has required member states to develop national

policies for the deployment of public charging infrastructure. Cities have operationalised these

mandates by incorporating public and semi-public charging stations into strategic mobility hubs. For

instance, Valencia and Dresden have implemented comprehensive charging plans based on AFID

benchmarks, ensuring that infrastructure deployment keeps pace with vehicle adoption (MAtchUP

D2.7, D3.7).

The Clean Vehicles Directive (EU) 2019/1161 has reinforced this policy momentum by mandating

minimum procurement targets for clean vehicles in public fleets. This has led to a significant increase

in the number of electric buses, vans, and service vehicles used by municipalities. Cities such as

Pamplona and Tampere have responded by launching pilot projects for electric public transport lines,

optimising their operations with data-driven charging management systems (STARDUST D2.1,

D3.1).

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Integration into city mobility plans

Successful cities embed e-mobility into their long-term urban mobility planning. Many have updated

Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) or climate strategies to include EV targets, charging

networks, and fleet electrification milestones. A lesson from EU smart city projects is that innovation

must align with existing plans: city officials should “work with concrete mobility plans such as

SUMPs… on the tactical level and [with] the general mobility ambitions of local and regional political

actors on the strategic level”. In practice, this means e-mobility measures aren’t ad hoc but part of

a coherent strategy. Vienna provides a strong example: under the Smarter Together project, Vienna

developed a local e-mobility strategy for a pilot district. This involved coordinating multiple actions

(from an “e-mobility point” mobility hub to electric car sharing and fleet integration) in line with its

Smart City Framework goals.

The city partnered with local employers and services – introducing electric vehicles at a Siemens

factory and deploying e-vans with fast chargers for the postal delivery fleet – as pilot actions to

inform wider rollout. By involving eight city departments in the project, Vienna ensured the lessons

(technical and governance) would be mainstreamed citywide [37] .

Other cities followed a similar integrated approach. Trento, as part of the STARDUST project,

created a comprehensive plan for e-mobility that included expanding the public charging network

and electrifying the municipal car fleet [38] . Trento even introduced supportive regulations. There,

for example, new taxi licensing rules set emission requirements to encourage electric or hybrid taxis

[39] . This policy change ensures that private transport services align with the city’s clean mobility

vision. In Milan (Sharing Cities project), officials took a holistic view: they not only installed 60 new

EV charge points and dedicated 125 parking bays for EVs, but also deployed 62 e-cars for shared

mobility and 10 electric logistics vehicles to cut delivery emissions [36] . By aggregating demand

for EVs and charging infrastructure in one district, Milan demonstrated a model that could be

replicated elsewhere [40]

These cases highlight that a clear strategy – supported by policy tools such as building codes,

procurement rules, and partnerships – is key to scaling e-mobility. Cities that treated EVs as an

integral part of urban development (rather than a sideline) saw more sustained success.

On the municipal level, Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) have emerged as a vital

planning tool. These plans enable cities to integrate e-mobility objectives into broader transportation

and urban development strategies. SUMPs in cities such as Trento, Leipzig, and Antalya have

included provisions for e-car sharing, electric bike networks, and multimodal hubs, demonstrating

how local authorities can tailor EU-wide frameworks to meet local needs (D4.1, MAtchUP D2.7,

D3.7).

In addition to these formal frameworks, many cities have utilised soft policy instruments to catalyse

adoption. Examples include preferential access for EVs in low-emission zones, exemption from

parking fees, and the allocation of dedicated EV charging spots. These incentives are often developed

in partnership with local utilities and private operators, contributing to the rapid growth of shared

charging platforms (ATELIER D4.6, IRIS D5.5). Several more examples are given below:

Reserved parking and charging access -Several cities introduced reserved parking for

electric vehicles, especially near city centres and key public transport nodes. Cases in point are

Trento and Leipzig, where such benefits improved user perception and visibility of e-mobility

solutions (SPARCS D4.5, STARDUST D4.1).In Pamplona, free EV parking and the installation of

chargers in municipal lots incentivised early EV adoption, particularly among private users

reluctant to invest without guaranteed infrastructure access (STARDUST D2.1).

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Access to restricted zones - Leipzig and Dresden piloted preferential EV access to low-

emission and congestion zones. This encouraged delivery companies to transition to e-vans to

retain access rights in inner-city areas (SPARCS D4.5, MAtchUP D3.7). Trento also allowed EVs

to operate in delivery-only time slots within the central logistics district—a significant advantage

for last-mile operators (STARDUST D4.1).

Use of the bus and priority lanes - Cities such as Tampere and Utrecht allowed e-car sharing

vehicles to use bus lanes during specific hours, thereby reducing travel time and increasing the

competitiveness of shared EVs compared to private combustion vehicles (IRIS D5.5, STARDUST

D3.1).

Public awareness and incentivised demonstrations - In Pamplona, events such as “Smart

Iruña Lab” showcased e-mobility technologies in real-world settings. Citizens tested e-bikes, e-

cars, and charging apps, which directly increased trust in these solutions (STARDUST D7.1). In

Valencia and Antalya, city campaigns offered temporary “free ride weeks” for electric buses and

scooters, drawing attention to comfort, performance, and operational cost parity (MAtchUP

D2.7, D4.7).

Targeted incentives for businesses - In Helsinki, local business owners were offered co-

financing to install shared-use charging stations on their premises (mySMARTLife D4.17). These

chargers served both their fleets and the public, effectively turning businesses into

infrastructure enablers.

Integration in city MaaS apps - Dresden and Pamplona integrated e-car sharing and e-bike

rental directly into city mobility platforms. Despite not being a regulation, the ease of discovery,

booking, and payment significantly improved user uptake (MAtchUP D3.8, IRIS D5.5).

EV purchase co-funding for taxi and logistics sectors - In Amsterdam and Utrecht, local

authorities subsidised EV procurement for taxi operators and logistics fleets. The additional

support made electric vans and taxis economically viable over their full lifecycle (ATELIER D4.6,

IRIS D5.5).

Public fleet electrification commitments

Many city governments led by example, adopting policies to electrify municipal fleets and public

transport. This not only directly reduces emissions but also builds local e-mobility expertise and

market confidence. Across Europe, a wave of city commitments has emerged to convert 100% of

bus fleets to zero-emission by a set date (often 2030). For instance, Milan’s transit agency (ATM)

has a well-publicised roadmap to replace all 1,200 diesel buses with e-buses by 2030, supported by

city policy and investment. As of 2024, ATM already runs ~250 electric buses and is progressively

phasing out diesel [36] .

Glasgow used the EU RUGGEDISED project to install a solar-panel-covered electric bus charging

hub and battery storage at a city car park. This was in preparation for a future e-bus fleet while also

demonstrating innovative business models for shared charging infrastructure [41] .

Policies such as the EU Clean Vehicles Directive bolster these efforts by legally binding cities/regions

to invest in clean buses (e.g. requiring nearly half of new buses procured in 2021–25 to be zero-

emission in many countries) [43] . On the municipal fleet side, cities have set procurement rules to

buy electric vehicles for city cars, vans, and garbage trucks whenever possible. Helsinki has been

a pioneer in this regard – the city set an official goal to replace its municipal service fleet with EVs

and has implemented e-car sharing for city employees [37] . Likewise, Vienna’s strategy included

putting electric vans in the city’s refuse collection and maintenance operations (in coordination with

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Austrian Post for delivery vehicles) [37] . These policy commitments send a strong market signal

and help build the case (and infrastructure) for wider private-sector adoption.

Public-private partnerships and stakeholder engagement

An important practical insight from the past decade is that city authorities cannot do it alone:

successful scaling of e-mobility requires coordinating stakeholders such as transit agencies, utilities,

businesses, and citizens. Policy frameworks have evolved to formalise these collaborations. For

example, Gothenburg’s IRIS project involved a “quadruple helix” model, aligning city departments,

local companies (such as Volvo and utility Göteborg Energi), research institutions, and end-users to

co-create solutions. Gothenburg even experimented with urban planning policy by implementing a

low (zero) parking requirement in a new housing development. The idea was to “pave the way for

different shared e-mobility solutions,” such as car sharing pools, e-bikes, and improved transit [43]

. In lieu of parking spaces, residents are offered Mobility-as-a-Service packages (the EC2B program)

with access to electric car-share vehicles and bikes – a regulatory innovation that required trust and

input from developers and citizens [42] . Cities are also engaging the private sector through incentive

schemes and partnerships. Barcelona, for example, worked closely with Nissan and local research

institutes in the GrowSmarter project to pilot vehicle-to-grid charging at the Nissan headquarters,

with the city facilitating grid connections and data-sharing [42] . In Norway, Stavanger’s

Triangulum project brought together the transit operator (Kolumbus) and county authorities to

deploy the first electric buses in Norway. Here, local schools and media were involved in a campaign

(designing the bus livery) to build public support [44] . This community engagement paid off – the

Stavanger e-bus trial provided operational insights to Kolumbus. Moreover, it also attracted visits

from transit agencies of cities like Prague and Leipzig, who came to “learn more about the electric

bus project” and then proceeded with their own e-bus investments [44] .

Such peer learning underscores that effective policy frameworks include knowledge exchange

platforms (often facilitated by EU programs) so that cities can replicate successes quickly.

Overall, policy frameworks supporting e-mobility in cities are most effective when they combine top-

down regulatory mandates with bottom-up urban planning and stakeholder engagement. As

evidenced by various city pilot projects across Europe, such hybrid approaches go beyond improving

implementation to also foster public trust and systemic resilience.

2.2.2 Key market trends affecting e-mobility adoption

The market dynamics surrounding the adoption of electric mobility solutions are multifaceted and

evolving. While policy frameworks create the enabling environment, market trends determine the

pace, scale, and direction of e-mobility transitions in cities. These trends encompass energy pricing,

consumer behaviour, technological advances, and business model innovation. As observed in

numerous smart city pilot projects, the interaction between these factors profoundly influences

municipal decision-making and private sector investment.

Based on the grey literature analysis, the following 5 (five) main market trends were structured and

identified:

1. Rapid growth of electric vehicle uptake

2. Expansion and innovation in charging infrastructure

3. Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) and energy integration

4. New Mobility Services (NMS) and user behaviours

5. Market confidence and cost trajectories

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Rapid growth of electric vehicle uptake

Perhaps the most fundamental trend is the surging adoption of electric cars and vans across Europe.

What started with a few thousand EVs in the early 2010s has grown exponentially. By 2023, over

2.4 million new electric cars were registered in the EU, representing 22.7% of all new car

sales that year.

This is a remarkable jump from just 1–2% EV share in 2015, signalling that electric

cars are no longer solely early-adopter curiosities. Driving this growth are factors such as falling

battery costs, extended driving ranges of new models, and a wider variety of EVs on the market

(from compact cars to SUVs). Nearly one in five cars sold in Europe in 2023 was electric when

counting plug-in hybrids, and pure battery-electric vehicles alone reached a record high (~15% of

new car sales in the EU).

This market maturity means cities can be more confident in planning for

an electric future. Residents and companies are increasingly choosing EVs on their own, especially

as total cost of ownership improves. This also means that supporting infrastructure must keep up.

For instance, public charging networks have expanded rapidly in response, leading cities like

Barcelona and Amsterdam now have hundreds to thousands of public charging points, often

integrated into parking facilities or streetlights. In our focus cities, Milan’s Sharing Cities project

installed 60 new public chargers in a short time span,

and Sonderborg (Denmark) has piloted

“intelligent charging stations” as part of its zero-carbon roadmap.

The expanding EV user base also

opens opportunities for new business models (e.g. private charging operators, mobility services)

that were hard to justify when EV numbers were small. However, the surge in EV adoption brings

challenges – notably, managing increased electricity demand and ensuring equitable access to

charging. Cities are addressing this through smart-grid solutions and careful urban planning (as

discussed further below).

A critical trend in urban e-mobility is the shift to electric buses and the electrification of

municipal fleets, which has accelerated in recent years. Thanks to technology improvements and

strong policy pushes, electric buses have moved from trial phase to scale deployment. In 2023,

battery-electric buses comprised roughly 36% of all new city bus sales in Europe,

up from

virtually zero a decade earlier. Analysts project that, at the current growth rate, 100% of new EU

city buses could be zero-emission by 2027

– a milestone that seemed ambitious just a few

years ago. This trend is fuelled by both economics (the total lifecycle cost of e-buses is becoming

competitive as battery prices fall) and by policy commitments: at least 27 major European cities

have targets to run only zero-emission buses by 2025 or 2030.

For example, Barcelona and

Stavanger were early movers in testing e-buses. Through the Triangulum project, Stavanger

deployed five electric buses (the first in Norway) starting in 2015–2017 to gather real-world

performance data.

The pilots proved successful – the e-buses reliably cut CO₂ and pollutant

emissions, and the project gathered insights on operations, maintenance, and driver training.

Now

many more Norwegian cities are following suit, illustrating how a trial can catalyse a broader shift.

In Milan, where the transit authority has committed to a full e-bus fleet by 2030, the scale is larger,

but the trajectory is similar: ATM already operates 300 electric buses (as of 2024) and is in the

process of phasing out diesel units' line by line.

The agency is heavily investing in charging

infrastructure (e.g. pantograph fast chargers at end stops and depot charging systems) and

leveraging funds to purchase hundreds of new e-buses in the next few years.

This rapid transit

electrification trend means city dwellers will increasingly experience e-mobility through cleaner,

Indicarors on the registration of new e-vehicles eea.europa.eu

E-vehicle sahre in the EU statista.com/statista.com

SharingCities Milan smart-cities-marketplace.ec.europa.eu

SmartenCity Sonderborg smart-cities-marketplace.ec.europa.eu /smart-cities-marketplace.ec.europa.eu

Norway Zero emission buses sustainable-bus.com

Rogaland in Triangulum Project triangulum.notriangulum.no

Driving experience in 5 electric buses triangulum.no

ATM Milano 1200 buses sustainable-bus.com

ATM Milano 1200 buses sustainable-bus.com/sustainable-bus.com

Replicating e-mobility solutions

quieter buses – building public acceptance and demand. It also means that transit agencies and city

planners must adapt bus schedules, depot layouts, and energy supply to suit electric operations

(e.g. scheduling charges during off-peak grid hours). Beyond buses, cities are electrifying other

fleets, including garbage trucks, street sweepers, and administrative cars. Helsinki integrated the

charging infrastructure for its electric maintenance vehicles in synergy with the bus-charging

network, optimising investments and operational costs.

Similarly, Tepebaşı/Eskisehir (Türkiye)

procured 22 hybrid/electric municipal service cars and 4 e-buses within its REMOURBAN project,

demonstrating how combining public fleet upgrades with infrastructure development can yield

integrated benefits.

The electrification of fleet trends is poised to continue as vehicle options

expand (e.g. more electric refuse truck models) and as cities enforce green procurement rules.

Expansion and innovation in charging infrastructure

A natural companion to the rise in EVs and e-fleets is the growth of charging infrastructure. This

goes beyond quantity to include intelligence and integration. Over the last decade, European cities

have installed tens of thousands of public charging points, ranging from standard AC chargers on

streets to ultra-fast DC hubs along highways. A key trend is the emergence of charging hubs and

“mobility points” that concentrate multiple charging stations (and sometimes other shared

mobility services) in convenient locations. For example, Glasgow is implementing an innovative

city-centre EV charging hub under the RUGGEDISED project: it features a solar canopy and on-site

battery storage to power several rapid chargers.

This hub not only serves public EV drivers but is

designed to reduce peak load on the grid (by buffering solar energy). This points to a future where

charging infrastructure doubles as energy infrastructure. Smart charging – adjusting charging

rates based on grid conditions and energy supply – is another important trend. Cities are working

with utilities to roll out smart charge points that can shift EV charging to times of high renewable

generation or low demand. In Sonderborg, “intelligent charging stations” were installed to align EV

charging with local wind power availability as part of its SmartEnCity program.

Moreover, some

cities are creatively using existing assets: London and Milan have experimented with converting

street lamp posts into EV chargers and, as noted in the framework of its Smart Street project

Glasgow is integrating chargers into street lights to provide curbside charging without new grid

connections.

The interoperability and user experience of charging have also improved – many

EU projects have focused on developing unified payment systems or apps so that drivers can locate

and use chargers easily. For instance, Bristol’s REPLICATE project deployed 24 public charge points

and ensured they were linked to the regional TravelWest journey planning app and a common access

card. This made it straightforward for car-share EVs and private EVs to charge.

As this trend

continues, we can expect charging to become more ubiquitous, faster, and smarter. City

practitioners are learning that planning for e-mobility at scale requires anticipating charger demand

in zoning and development (e.g. requiring new buildings to include EV-ready wiring). It also

potentially calls for dedicating curb space or public parking lots for charging hubs. The market is also

trending toward ultra-fast chargers (150+ kW) for quick top-ups, which may change the calculus

of how many chargers are needed if each can serve more vehicles per day. In summary, robust and

smart charging networks are both responding to EV growth and enabling further growth by

alleviating “range anxiety” and charging anxiety.

Electrification Maintenance and Logistics in Helsinki mysmartlife.eu

Tepebasi – Turkey in REMOURBAN Project smart-cities-marketplace.ec.europa.eu /smart-cities-

marketplace.ec.europa.eu

Glasgow pushes on the implementation of Smart Solutions projects cordis.europa.eu/cordis.europa.eu

Sonderborg current situations in charging stations smart-cities-marketplace.ec.europa.eu/smart-cities-

marketplace.ec.europa.eu

Glasgow pushes on the implementation of Smart Solutions projects cordis.europa.eu

Charging points developed in Bristol replicate-project.eu/replicate-project.eu

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) and energy integration

As electric mobility scales, the convergence of the transport and energy sectors is a significant trend.

Increasingly, e-mobility is being viewed both as a consumer of electricity and as a potential

contributor to grid stability and renewable energy use. The concept of bidirectional charging

(allowing EV batteries to discharge power back to the grid or building) has moved from theoretical

to practical pilots. A high-priority innovation for many EU projects has been testing V2G (Vehicle-

to-grid) technology in real urban environments. For example, the GrowSmarter project in Barcelona

included a landmark V2G demonstration: two bidirectional chargers were installed at Nissan’s

corporate offices, integrated with on-site solar PV panels and a stationary battery to create a smart

energy ecosystem.

In this setup, Nissan’s fleet EVs could both charge and feed energy back into

the building during peak hours (Vehicle-to-building, a form of V2X). The results were compelling:

the facility cut its energy consumption by 13% and reduced energy costs by 16%, while shaving

peak demand and reducing CO₂ emissions nearly 18%. This proved the technical and financial

viability of using parked EVs as flexible storage units, a finding with broad implications. Other cities

are following suit: Utrecht (a fellow IRIS project city, not included in the primary list) has deployed

dozens of V2G chargers in a residential neighbourhood, and in the focus list, Helsinki has launched

one of the first public two-way charging points in Europe as a pilot. Although still in early stages,

these pilots indicate a market trend toward energy-smart mobility. In practice, this means city

fleets or even private EV owners could earn revenue or rewards by supporting the grid (for instance,

discharging a bit of energy at peak times, or soaking up excess wind power at night). Some municipal

projects are already exploring Vehicle-to-grid for bus depots: an electric bus with a large battery

can potentially feed the depot or grid when idle. For city decision-makers, V2G offers a tantalising

win-win: it can improve the business case for EVs (through energy services income) and help

manage local grid constraints that might otherwise limit EV expansion. This strategy, however, also

requires updated regulations (for energy market participation) and new partnerships (with grid

operators). The clear lesson from the EU smart city demonstrators is that planning e-mobility at

scale should go hand-in-hand with renewable energy and storage planning. Cities such as

Rotterdam, Utrecht, and Gothenburg are already designing “energy positive” districts where

solar panels, community batteries, and EV charging all interact. The IRIS project in Gothenburg

explicitly tackled this by developing new control systems to handle many small-scale renewable

inputs and various storage (including EVs) together. The trend is toward integrated urban energy

and mobility platforms, rather than siloed systems.

New Mobility Services (NMS) and user behaviours

Another trend impacting e-mobility adoption is the rise of new mobility paradigms – shared, on-

demand, and multimodal transport – many of which are well-suited to electrification. Electric car

sharing, e-taxis, and e-bike/scooter sharing have proliferated in cities, creating more opportunities

for citizens to experience e-mobility without owning a vehicle. Several of our case cities piloted such

services. Bristol, for example, introduced an electric on-demand mini-bus (a taxi-bus called

“WeGo”) using a zero-emission vehicle to provide shared rides to events.

The city also integrated

11 electric cars into a car club fleet (Co-wheels car sharing) so that neighbourhood residents

could rent an EV by the hour. These services not only reduce private car use but also familiarise

more people with electric driving, easing psychological barriers. Vienna tested an exclusive e-car

sharing system for social housing residents, pairing it with community engagement to encourage a

shift away from personal cars. This aligns with a broader cultural trend: younger urban populations

are showing less interest in car ownership and more interest in convenient, tech-enabled transport.

This creates an opening for e-mobility if cities can provide the infrastructure. Freight and logistics

are also evolving: last-mile delivery is electrifying, often with cargo e-bikes or small e-vans in

How Smart City projects integrates Sustainable Mobility smart-cities-marketplace.ec.europa.eu/smart-cities-

marketplace.ec.europa.eu

Replicate Project – Bristol Case Study - replicate-project.eu

Replicating e-mobility solutions

city centres. Trento’s plan for a logistics centre that consolidates goods outside the city and delivers

them solely with electric vehicles is a case in point.

Many cities are trialling similar “green logistics”

schemes, encouraged by both market trends (e-commerce growth demanding more delivery

vehicles) and policy (cities imposing stricter emission rules for delivery vans). The market trend of

remote work and flexible work schedules (accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic) has also affected

travel patterns. This potentially makes concepts such as on-demand shuttles or e-bike sharing more

popular relative to fixed-route transit. For city practitioners, the implication is that e-mobility

initiatives should be coupled with mobility-as-a-service platforms and behavioural incentives to

reduce car dependency. If people can easily find an electric car-share or hop on an electric bus or

scooter for that last-mile, they are more likely to choose a sustainable mode. The private sector is

actively innovating here (with apps and platforms). Here, cities often act as facilitators or regulators

to ensure these services align with public goals. Helsinki, for example, has been a leader in

integrating various mobility options – the mySMARTLife project’s autonomous e-minibus trial was

incorporated into Helsinki’s journey planner (Reittiopas) and given an official route number. This

shows how even novel e-mobility services can be normalised within the public transport network.

The trend is toward seamless intermodality, where a person’s trip might involve an electric bus, then

an e-bike share, etc., all booked via one system. This human-centric approach boosts adoption by

making e-mobility the convenient choice.

Market confidence and cost trajectories

Finally, an overarching trend is the improving economics and stakeholder confidence in e-mobility

solutions. Over the last ten years, battery costs per kWh dropped significantly, making EVs and large

batteries (for buses or storage) far more affordable. Total cost of ownership for many EVs is now on

par or cheaper than combustion vehicles in Europe, especially when fuel savings and lower

maintenance are factored in. This trend, combined with rising carbon costs or fuel prices, means

that cities and fleet operators see electrification as a financially sound long-term decision, not merely

an environmental one. This is visibly reflected in procurement: cities such as Milan, Gothenburg, and

Barcelona are no longer hesitating to plan large EV purchases. The market has also consolidated

around certain standards (for charging connectors, payment systems, etc.), reducing the risk of

“betting on the wrong technology.” Moreover, success stories from one city give confidence to others.

Accordingly, after seeing a peer city’s electric bus line run reliably, municipal leaders and the public

are more willing to support their own e-bus project. This is why the EU’s Smart Cities Marketplace

and similar platforms have been vital: they spread practical know-how and data (range performance,

cost-benefit analyses, user satisfaction levels) from pilot cities to followers. As an illustration, the

Triangulum project noted that its e-bus trial in Stavanger not only saved local emissions but also

served as a real-world showroom that convinced other Norwegian counties and even foreign cities

to invest in electric buses.

The trial in Stavanger acted as a real-world showroom by integrating

electric buses into the city’s public transport system, showcasing their technical viability and

environmental benefits. The successful implementation, combined with real-time data monitoring

and stakeholder collaboration, demonstrated the scalability of the solution, convincing other cities

to adopt similar initiatives with confidence.

Recent discussions on reducing the importance of environmental legislation, tariffs on electric

vehicles, and a generally uncertain economy in parts of Europe have a significant influence on the

current market conditions and the uptake of e-mobility solutions.

Recharging e-vehicles case study in the City of Trento stardustproject.eu/stardustproject.eu

Helsinki – Autonomous e-buses mysmartlife.eu

Experience of the bus drivers onto e-buses triangulum.no

Replicating e-mobility solutions

2.3 Key insights from the state-of-the-art

The state-of-the-art review confirms that electromobility plays a central role in Europe's transition

to a more sustainable, lower-emission transport system. The convergence of political ambitions

(such as the European Green Deal or the "Fit for 55" legislative package), technological advances,

and growing social awareness is driving the adoption of electric vehicles across the continent.

However, multiple barriers remain that hinder widespread and comprehensive implementation.

These barriers include technical aspects such as the scarcity of charging infrastructure and the

limited deployment of V2G technologies; economic challenges such as high upfront costs and

unequal access to financing; and social, legal, and political factors that vary considerably across

countries and cities.

A key finding from the analysis of European projects funded in previous years is the thematic

convergence around a limited number of urban mobility solutions. Despite the diversity of pilots and

strategies analysed, most efforts are focused on three aspects: fleet electrification—especially urban

buses, last-mile delivery vehicles, and ride-sharing; the deployment of public charging infrastructure

(especially smart charging stations and charging hubs); and the testing of bidirectional charging

technologies (Vehicle-to-grid, V2G). In contrast, areas such as wireless charging, battery innovation,

and standardisation receive significantly less attention in these city-led projects.

These efforts suggest higher technological maturity and higher replicability potential in three areas:

fleet electrification, public charging infrastructure, and V2G technologies. Consequently, in this

report, a detailed analysis is prioritised, taking into account these three elements and identifying

best practices and scalable models that will foster their widespread adoption in Europe.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

3. Case studies, multicriteria analysis and

evaluation

Based on the state-of-the-art, this chapter provides a comprehensive analysis of the success factors

for a large-scale adoption and replication of e-mobility solutions across Europe. In a first step, the

central modules (solution modules) and associated factors from different dimensions that determine

the adoption are identified. Following up on this, the most important factors per solution module are

derived using a standardised expert assessment. In a second step, and with the knowledge of the

most important success factors, suitable cities are selected and analysed. The analysis and

evaluation process

comprises a comprehensive

document review, expert

interviews, as well as an in-

depth assessment of various

market factors and business

models, customer aspects,

along with technological and

regulatory elements. The

chapter concludes with a

summary of best practices

for overcoming existing

challenges.

Figure 7: Successful upscaling of e-mobility solutions

3.1 Successful upscaling of e-mobility (methodology)

3.1.1 Solution modules for the successful introduction and spread of

e-mobility

The successful introduction and scaling of electromobility depends on numerous factors and can be

achieved using different approaches. To ensure the comprehensive use of electromobility in urban

areas, three building blocks charging infrastructure, electrification of fleets, and the interface

between the vehicle and the energy system have proven to be crucial to success. To get closer to

the implementation level, five specific solution modules within the three above building blocks are

analysed in more detail.

For the charging infrastructure, the focus is on the solution module “Public charging system”

because this element can be understood as a backbone for a wide adoption alongside the electrified

vehicles. Within the electrification of fleets, a distinction is made between the “Electric bus

system”, “Last-mile delivery” and the “Vehicle-sharing system”. These three solution modules

together cover a large part of the urban mobility needs and enable a smooth transport of goods. At

the interface between the vehicle and the energy system, “Bidirectional electric vehicle

charging” is analysed in greater depth here because this solution module offers major advantages

not only for the energy system but also from the customer's point of view.

1a.

Specific

Solutions

1b.

Success

Factors

Selection

of Cities

Evaluation from

the Case Studies

per Solution

Module

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Table 2: E-mobility solutions analysed during the study

I. Charging

infrastructure

II. Electrification of

fleets

III.Vehicle-to-grid

Public charging system

Electric bus system

Bidirectional electric vehicle

charging

Last-mile delivery

Vehicle-sharing system

To better guide the reader through the report, the team has assigned different colour codes to the

5 solutions (as introduced in Table 2).

3.1.2 Success factors for the upscaling of electromobility per

solution module

In order to create a manageable variety of influencing factors and to derive more in-depth findings

on this basis, success factors per solution module are identified and evaluated.

The approach is via

comprehensive desk research. The factors are categorised according to the dimensions ‘market’,

‘customer’, ‘technology’ and ‘regulatory’. Based on this, an independent assessment of the

factors is conducted by the experts involved in the report on a scale of 1 (not important) - 5

(extremely important).

Charging infrastructure – Public charging system

As noted above, the public charging infrastructure can be understood as the backbone for the broad

success of electromobility. Whereas technology is undergoing further development regarding high-

power fast charging or bidirectional charging, AC charging is already well-advanced. Nonetheless,

high infrastructure costs as well as a lack of regulatory authority on the city level continue to pose

a challenge for cities. This, in turn, is reflected in a lack of coverage (on the market side) and

availability (on the customer side) in many places. [45] . Continuous maintenance is required to

ensure the availability of the already installed infrastructure. From a regulatory perspective,

incentives and subsidies are an important means of helping cities meet the challenges described

above.

The expert rating shows 1) Success factors with the highest ratings (average rating of 4.4 or higher,

marked bold) and 2) extended rating (average rating of 4.0-4.3) for:

Table 3: Success factors – Public charging system

I. Charging infrastructure – Public charging system

Market

Customer

Technology

Regulatory

• Infrastructure

costs (4.6)

• Coverage (4.6)

• Availability (4.6)

• Incentives and

subsidies (4.8)

Explanation - 28-37 factors per module were identified.

1= not/slightly important, 2= moderate important, 3 = important, 4 = very important, 5 = extremely

important

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• Ongoing

maintenance

(4.4)

• Strategic location

of charging

stations (4.2)

• Partnerships (4.0)

• Public and private

investment (4.0)

• Usability (4.2)

• Interoperability

(4.2)

• Charging options

(4.2)

• Grid connectivity

and integration

(4.2)

• Modular and

scalable

infrastructure (4.0)

• Grants for local

governments (4.0)

Electrification of fleets – Electric bus system

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis shows that battery electric buses will achieve cost parity

towards diesel within the next few years, if this is not the case already (depending on various factors

such as energy prices, infrastructure costs, and purchasing strategy). While E-buses have a higher

initial capital expenditure compared to the diesel equivalent, they feature lower operating costs due

to reduced fuel and maintenance expenses, as electric drivetrains have fewer moving parts and

require less frequent servicing compared to traditional diesel engines. [46] To maximise the

advantage during operation, real-time monitoring and control systems are key regarding resource

utilisation. In the wake of the current trade conflicts and strategic positioning of the trading powers,

a strong sourcing dependency, especially on China, presents a considerable risk. This is because the

current supply chain for electrical buses and their batteries relies heavily on non-European countries.

European production comes at a 30-40% higher cost and is not estimated to meet the demand for

such buses until 2028 [47] . In this context, considerable efforts must be made in Europe to realise

large parts of the value creation and production. In order to bridge the cost gap, at least in the first

few years, additional government subsidies and incentives are needed. Moreover, additional

measures such as LEZs are necessary to provide an appropriate framework for a transformation

towards a 100% electric bus system.

The expert rating shows 1) Success factors with the highest ratings (average rating of 4.4 or higher,

marked bold) and 2) extended rating (average rating of 4.0-4.3) for:

Table 4: Success factors – Electric bus system

II. Electrification of fleets – Electric bus system

Market

Customer

Technology

Regulatory

• Total Cost of

Ownership (TCO)

(4.8)

• Real-time

monitoring and

control (4.4)

• Policy measures

(4.8)

• Government

subsidies and

incentives (4.4)

• Charging infrastructure

costs (4.2)

• Energy price (4.2)

• Charging infrastructure

availability (4.0)

• Concession agreements

(4.0)

• Efficient dispatch

and scheduling (4.2)

• Data analytics

and predictive

maintenance (4.2)

• Flexible and

scalable design

(4.0)

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Electrification of fleets – Last-mile delivery

Triggered by the rise in e-commerce and the on-demand economy, traffic and environmental pollution

in cities are increasing. This increases the need for new and effective urban logistics concepts. Micro-

hubs and local warehouses are pivotal for innovative last-mile delivery solutions [48] . To increase

delivery density and reduce failed deliveries and distances, data-driven routing and real-time monitoring

are becoming important. To meet the expectations of modern urban areas, green delivery solutions

require a new standard as well as a rethink regarding business cases and models. Smart technologies

(e.g. AI) are viewed as a connecting element and accelerator for the successful establishment of these

mobility solutions.

The expert rating shows 1) Success factors with the highest ratings (average rating of 4.4 or higher,

marked bold) and 2) extended rating (average rating of 4.0-4.3) for:

Table 5: Success factors – Last-mile delivery

II. Electrification of fleets – Last-mile delivery

Market

Customer

Technology

Regulatory

• Micro-hubs and local

warehouses

(5.0)

• Business cases (4.8)

• Business model

(4.6)

• Data-driven

routing (4.8)

• Real-time monitoring

(4.4)

• Smart technology (4.4)

• Partnerships (4.2)

• Delivery options/models

(4.0)

• Residents'

acceptanc

e (4.2)

• Smart parking (4.2)

• Delivery density (4.0)

• Frameworks

(4.2)

• Public and

private

partnerships

(4.0)

Electrification of fleets – Vehicle-sharing system

To become an alternative to existing solutions (mainly the private car), a vehicle-sharing system must

fulfil several requirements. From a market perspective, central aspects are the pricing of the mobility

offer and the associated business model to represent an economically viable solution in the long term.

The most important success factors in relation to the customer are customer satisfaction itself and,

linked to this, the aspects of functionality, accessibility, and availability of the mobility service. Finally,

local regulations and licences, as well as permits for infrastructure, are key for a broad roll-out.

The expert rating shows 1) Success factors with the highest ratings (average rating of 4.4 or higher,

marked bold) and 2) extended rating (average rating of 4.0-4.3) for:

Table 6: Success factors – Vehicle-sharing system

II. Electrification of fleets – Vehicle-sharing system

Market

Customer

Technology

Regulatory

• Pricing (4.6)

• Business model

(4.4)

• Functionality (4.8)

• Availability (4.6)

• Satisfaction (4.6)

• Accessibility (4.4)

• Permits for

infrastructure

(4.8)

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• Local

regulations and

licences (4.6)

• Fleet distribution

(4.0)

• (strategic)

Partnerships (4.0)

• Real-time data and

tracking (4.2)

Vehicle-to-grid – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging

Upscaling of bidirectional electric vehicle charging depends heavily on market - and technology-related

aspects. This specifically involves the right economic framework, which includes lower infrastructure

costs, low energy prices, and dynamic pricing models. At the same time, technological progress must

be made regarding the availability of bidirectional charging capable vehicles (among all vehicle

segments, not only premium) as well as on the infrastructure level. The associated efforts can only be

solved by a cross-sectoral approach including stakeholders from municipalities, vehicle manufacturers,

as well as infrastructure and energy providers).

The expert rating shows 1) Success factors with the highest ratings (average rating of 4.4 or higher,

marked bold) and 2) extended rating (average rating of 4.0-4.3) for:

Table 7: Success factors – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging

III. Vehicle-to-grid – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging

Market

Customer

Technology

Regulatory

• Energy price (5.0)

• Infrastructure

costs (5.0)

• Dynamic pricing

models (4.6)

• User acceptance

(4.0)

• Functionality (4.0)

• Feed-back

remuneration (4.0)

• Ease of use incl.

accessibility (4.0)

• Charging and

backfeeding

capacity (4.2)

• Grid connectivity

and integration

(4.2)

• Standardised

communication

protocols (4.2)

• Dynamic load

management (4.0)

• Utility collaboration

(4.0)

• Frameworks (4.0)

Replicating e-mobility solutions

3.2 Selection of cities

The selection of cities for further analysis was based on several aspects. Firstly, the cities are

analysed according to their activities regarding their relation to the solution modules described

above. Based on this, two cities per solution module were selected that have corresponding activities

but differ in terms of their approach, maturity and local conditions, as well as business

model. This approach helps to derive successful scaling examples and to present obstacles and

necessary solutions to address them.

Criteria considered:

▪ 2 cities per solution

▪ Opposite market

readiness level (success

and failure stories)

▪ Existence of climate

urban conditions

(technology

performance and

resilience)

▪ Business models already

developed

Figure 8: Selection of cities based on predefined criteria

For the solution module “Public charging system”, Stockholm (Growsmarter) and Vitoria-Gasteiz

(SmartEnCity) are analysed in more detail. Within the module "Electric bus system”, Valladolid

(REMOURBAN) and Stavanger (Triangulum) serve as case studies, whereas Vienna (Smarter

Together) and Nottingham (REMOURBAN) are selected for the “Last-mile delivery” module. To gain

more knowledge about the optimal upscaling of a “Vehicle-sharing system”, Amsterdam (ATELIER)

and Utrecht (IRIS Smart Cities) are chosen. For the “Bidirectional electric vehicle charging” module,

a closer examination of Zaragoza (NEUTRALPATH) as well as Trondheim (+CityxChange) is

conducted.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Table 8: Selection of cities per solution

I. Charging

infrastructure

II. Electrification of

fleets

III.Vehicle-to-grid

Public charging system

Stockholm (higher maturity)

Vitoria-Gasteiz (lower maturity)

Electric bus system

Valladolid (lower maturity)

Stavanger (higher maturity)

Bidirectional electric

vehicle charging

Zaragoza (lower maturity)

Trondheim (higher maturity)

Last-mile delivery

Vienna (higher maturity)

Nottingham (lower maturity)

Vehicle-sharing system

Amsterdam (higher maturity)

Utrecht (higher maturity)

I. Charging infrastructure – Public charging system

Stockholm

Sweden’s capital city, Stockholm, is one of the

fastest-growing regions in Europe. This year (2025),

the city will exceed one million inhabitants, whereas

the metropolitan area has a population of around 2.5

million [49] [50] . The city has been working on

climate change mitigation and adaptation since the

1990s and represents a frontrunner regarding the

implementation of climate action plans and

pioneering policies [51] [52] [53]

SCC Project:

Within the GrowSmarter project (2015-2019),

Barcelona, Cologne, and Stockholm worked on 12

smart solutions. One concrete measure was the

development of charging infrastructure.

Regarding the development of public charging

infrastructure, Stockholm realised one rapid and eight

normal charging points with different characteristics

and business approaches. While the normal charging

stations were installed in residential areas, the fast

charger owned by a private partner was installed at a

fast-food restaurant on public land. The users of fast

charging, mainly taxis and couriers, must pay a fee.

Challenges and obstacles:

Besides the technical implementation, the focus was

on identifying suitable locations and overcoming

hurdles regarding grid connection, e.g. delay of the

installation process due to lack of capacity in the

network management company.

Developments and current situation: [56] [53]

• 380,000 registered cars (2024)

Vitoria-Gasteiz

Situated in the north of Spain, with a population of

around 250,000 (2024)[54] Vitoria-Gasteiz rapidly

transformed from a small medieval town to an

industrial location in the mid-20th century. Regarding

the maturity of mobility and infrastructure activities,

the city set a first foundation for growth, which must

be further expanded in the coming years.

SCC Project:

The vision of the SmartEnCity project (2016-2022)

was to create zero-carbon cities focusing on reducing

energy demand and maximising energy supply[55] .

Tartu, Sonderborg, as well as Vitoria-Gasteiz served

as Lighthouse cities addressing building retrofitting,

district heating network, e-buses, electrical fleets,

and charging infrastructure, as well as last-mile

logistics and ICT infrastructure. Regarding the EV

fleets and charging infrastructure, Vitoria-Gasteiz

aimed to progressively electrify municipality and

public/private companies´ fleets and to deploy EV

charging infrastructure in the municipality. In

addition, the city pursued the goals to increase the

visibility and acceptance of EVs as well as to raise

awareness about sustainable mobility. This pertained

specifically to fully electric transport, including cars,

vans, and e-bikes. For these reasons, the head office

of Visesa (VIS) incorporated five EVs and installed two

charging stations with two connection points each.

This was accompanied by five charging points at the

Giroa-Veolia offices as well as two charging points at

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• >100,000 EVs (BEVs + PHEVs) (2024)

• Approximately 3000 public charging stations

(~2500 on-street + charging stations in

parking garages and fuelling stations) for

electric vehicles (2024)

the parking lot of the new Cathedral of Vitoria-

Gasteiz.25

Challenges and obstacles:

One of the biggest challenges was to raise awareness

and acceptance of sustainable mobility and to present

new forms of transport in the city. As only a few

vehicles were purchased and a few charging points

installed, this goal was put to the test.

Developments and current situation:

Situation at the end of the project (2023):

• 116,500 vehicles at the end of 2023 [57]

• 1595 additional electric vehicles in 2025[59]

Charging stations (2025)[60]

• 1 Tesla supercharger hub (12 connectors)

• 1 Thunder location 360 kW (4 devices)

• 23 locations (hubs) of more than 150 kW

• 45 locations (hubs) of more than 50 kW

• 62 locations (hubs) with AC chargers

II. Electrification of fleets – Electric bus system

Valladolid

Valladolid is the capital of the autonomous region of

Castile and Leon in northwest Spain. Valladolid has a

population of around 300,000 (its metropolitan area

~400,000) people (2024), making it northwestern

Spain's biggest city. The automotive industry is one

of the major motors of the city's economy. The Old

Town is made up of a variety of historic houses,

palaces, churches, plazas, avenues, and parks.

SCC Project:

Valladolid, together with Nottingham and Tepebasi

served as Lighthouse cities within the REMOURBAN

project (2015-2020).[61] The overall objectives were

to reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions[62]

and to improve the clean transport infrastructure.

The bus system in Valladolid is run by a public urban

bus company (AUVASA) that operates as a network

with 22 regular lines and 5 late-night lines. For the

project purpose, four fast charging points for electric

buses were installed, as well as 3 electric buses

incorporated (2 PHEV, 1 FEV).

Challenges and obstacles:

The integration of the new buses into the fleet and

the installation of the charging infrastructure

presented the players with major challenges because

of minimal experience and technical problems, for

example, with the charging protocols.

Developments and current situation:

• 17 Vectia Veris 12 Hybrid (2024)

Stavanger

Stavanger is a city and municipality in Norway. It is

the third largest city (~150,000 inhabitants) and the

third largest metropolitan area in Norway. It holds the

status as the European Capital of Energy. Since the

discovery of oil in the North Sea in 1969, the city has

been the onshore centre for the Norwegian oil

industry, and most of the city’s growth and

employment resulted from the oil boom. But the oil

crisis serves as a driver to discover new business

areas and has opened an arena for Smart City

businesses to grow, especially in the fields of smart

living or smart health care. Stavanger has set some

ambitious development goals such as the reduction of

CO2 emissions by 20% until 2020, 50% by 2030

(1990 base), and complete carbon neutrality by 2050.

SCC Project:

Within the Triangulum project (2015-2020)

Starvanger aimed to introduce battery-powered

electric buses in public transport as a first step

towards an emission-free bus network. The bus

design was finalised through an open design

competition in schools. At the start of the project, five

electric buses were purchased (three of them were

bought through the Triangulum project). The project

planned to implement the buses in less than 2 years

(VAT on BEV (-25%)). The electric buses travel

>18,000km per year, avoiding the emissions of up to

250 kg CO2 and 66 kg NOx.

Challenges and obstacles:

In September 2023, one of leading South European charging infrastructure operators Zunder inaugurated

Spain’s largest electrification project for public charging of EV cars in the city of Vitoria-Gasteiz: The largest

public electrification project for EV cars in Spain uses Kempower chargers - Kempower

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• 11 Full Electric Irizar Ietram (2024) with top-

down pantograph technology; 630 kWh on-

board battery) – Planned to purchase 93 buses

in total26

The oil price crisis and the depletion of fossil fuel

resources caused particular problems for the city in

2015. Unemployment rose to 4.4 % (compared to 1

% in the previous period27), which motivated a debate

on new value creation opportunities. In addition,

Norway generally has high labour costs.

Developments and current situation:

The project paved the way for the continuous

expansion of the bus fleet. Today, more than 60 e-

buses are in use in the region.

II. Electrification of fleets – Last-mile delivery

Vienna

Vienna is Austria’s capital and most populous city, with

around 2 Mio. inhabitants (2025).[63]

The city of Vienna has always strived to achieve

sustainable transportation, reduce fossil fuel

consumption, and implement new measures related to

smart cities.

SCC Project:

In Vienna, the Smarter Together project (2016-2021)

was implemented in the 11th District of Vienna, which is

also known as Simmering. The program funded

approximately 7 million euros for the project, and this

triggered a total investment of over 80 million euros.

There are approximately 21,000 residents in the project

area.

In addition to the energy-, ICT-, and governance-related

objectives in Vienna, Sustainable Urban Mobility also has

very important goals related to reducing CO2 emissions.

One of the subprojects was specifically focused on last-

mile delivery with the Austrian Post distribution company.

Austrian Post is committed to delivering all types of mail

items throughout the country in a CO2 neutral manner. In

the SmartTogether project, the Simmering project area

was provided with two e-vehicles for letter and parcel

delivery services.

Since January 2017, two vehicles supplied by IVECO

Austria Gesellschaft m.b.H, (Iveco Daily Electric 3.5t

model) have been deployed.

Challenges and obstacles:

The main challenges of the project were focused on the

early adoption of the e-vans due to a limited range and

dependency on the weather. On average, the vehicles

reach a maximum distance per charge of 55 kilometres in

summer and 40 kilometres in winter, delivering

approximately 130 parcels daily.

Developments and current situation:

Following the conclusion of the Smarter Together project,

Vienna has continued to advance its sustainable last-mile

Nottingham

Nottingham, one of the major cities in the East

Midlands is situated 130 miles north of London

and has an official population of around 320,000

(2025) [65] . Nottingham City developed a City

2020 Energy (and Carbon) strategy in 2010.

SCC Project:

As part of the REMOURBAN project (2015-

2019), Nottingham applied for measures in the

areas of energy, mobility, and ICT, which also

include non-technical actions relating to the

components of society. The area around Sneinton

Road was selected for the project

implementations.

Regarding e-mobility and specifically in the Last-

mile delivery module, the project aimed to

develop a small local consolidation centre for last-

mile delivery by using small electric vehicles for

the transportation of goods in the city centre. This

reduced the number of large vehicles used for

domestic and business deliveries.

Challenges and obstacles:

Although the stakeholders of the project were

quite satisfied with the results, several very

important requirements and challenges emerged

during its runtime:

▪ A LMD service requires buy-in and support

from local government to be fully supported

and effective.

▪ Currently, a limited number of companies can

provide such a service.

▪ The provision of software to track, record,

and update customers is essential as part of

this process.

Developments and current situation:

The current situation with LMD in Nottingham

after REMOURBAN is remarkable. Different

D6.10 Smart City Framework – Update WP6, Task 6.6 January 2020 (M60)

Replicating e-mobility solutions

delivery initiatives, particularly emphasising the

integration of electric vehicles into urban logistics.

Austrian Post has been at the forefront of this transition;

as of April 2024, It operates over 4,000 electric vehicles

across Austria, including more than 2,700 e-transporters

and 1,200 e-bikes, e-cargo bikes, e-mopeds, and e-

trikes. [64]

projects were initiated by private companies such

as Rexel UK Ltd, which has expanded its electric

van fleet in Nottingham to reduce emissions[66]

or the new eCargo bike initiative by the city

council.[67]

II. Electrification of fleets – Vehicle-sharing system

Amsterdam

Amsterdam is the capital and most populous city in

the Netherlands. The population was 933,680 in June

2024 [68] within the city proper, 1,457,018 in the

urban area, and 2,480,394 in the metropolitan area.

The city is known for its large number of canals

(UNESCO World Heritage) and is one of the cities

most involved in the development of smart cities,

ahead of other European capitals in e-mobility. Far-

reaching smart urban solutions are facilitated through

a special derogation from Dutch energy laws,

exempting the PED from several potential legal

obstacles that could otherwise hamper or even forbid

the development of an innovative, efficient energy

system such as the “Local Energy Market Platform”.

SCC Project:

Within the ATELIER project (2019-2026) and with

respect to the Vehicle-sharing system module,

Amsterdam is working on eHubs, i.e. on-street

locations that bring together e-bikes, e-cargo bikes,

e-scooters, and electric cars. This solution allows

users to choose from a wide range of options to

experiment with and use in various situations. The

idea is to give a high-quality and diverse offer of

shared electric mobility services to dissuade citizens

from owning private cars. The result is cleaner, more

liveable, and pleasant cities.

The Buiksloterham hub, from the ATELIER project,

can be characterised as a local/neighbourhood hub to

strongly promote the use of micro-mobility and

shared vehicles as an alternative to privately owned

cars. The hub initially consisted of 5 electric cars and

7 electric bikes, available exclusively for the

Schoonschip community. The overall objective is to

build, test, and validate the functioning (including the

governance and legal aspects) of such sharing

platforms.

Challenges and obstacles:

Certain challenges appeared during the life of the

project, but one of the initial ones was the price of the

service. At the beginning, Schoonschip was not fully

inhabited year-round, and the use of the hub was

below expectations. Only 60% of the adult inhabitants

registered. Of those, only a handful used the hub

frequently (8 or more trips per month). It appeared

that only 4 cars would be enough to guarantee 95%

availability. People kept the cars they already had,

Utrecht

Utrecht has around 370,000 inhabitants (2023) [70]

[71] , and is the fourth biggest and fastest growing

municipality in the Netherlands. The city aims to

become a climate-neutral and climate-robust city by

2030. Back in 2015, the city already had the highest

rate of PV systems implemented in the Netherlands

(10 MWp), more than 4000 electric vehicles

registered, and 260 public charging stations installed.

Regarding electric buses in the city, the municipality

had decided, together with the provincial authorities

who lead the concessions, to have 100% electric

buses in 2025.

SCC Project:

In the IRIS project (2017-2023), the MaaS “We Drive

Solar” car sharing system was demonstrated in the

LH demo district by means of 14 solar-powered V2G

e-cars delivered by Renault. In spring 2022, Hyundai

and We Drive Solar launched the world’s first series-

produced V2G car (26 Hyundai IONIQ5 V2G e-cars)

in Utrecht. Additional innovative methods were

demonstrated (service co-creation, change agents,

campaigns) to motivate and train the residents

toward energy-saving behaviour and to use the solar-

powered V2G e-car sharing system WeDriveSolar and

e-buses instead of their own conventional cars. The

shared e-cars will provide a green alternative mode

of transport for the IRIS district residents, reducing

NOx, fine particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and

carbon dioxide emissions. At the same time, their

batteries contribute to smart energy management,

combining sustainable transport with maximising

self-consumption and reducing grid stress. This also

helps to unlock the financial value of grid flexibility.

Challenges and obstacles:

The plan to implement bidirectional V2G e-cars in the

demonstration was delayed because V2G production

cars were not available. Late changes in the final ISO

15118-20 standard, which was issued in May 2022,

involved significant changes over the draft versions.

Developments and current situation:

The V2G and e-car sharing system from WeDriveSolar

is currently continuing its expansion with new

chargers compatible with ISO15118-20 and new car

models such as the new Renault R5.[71]

Replicating e-mobility solutions

and those could be parked free of charge a few

kilometres away.

Developments and current situation:

Amsterdam is now one of the most developed cities

regarding e-car sharing. In 2025, there are more than

3250 cars, most of them electric.[69] Private

companies such as Free2move, GreenMobility, and

MyWheels profited from the ATELIER project

experience.

III. Vehicle-to -grid – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging

Zaragoza

Zaragoza, with nearly 689,000 inhabitants (2024), is

the capital city of the province of Zaragoza and the

autonomous community of Aragon. From an

administrative point of view, the city is divided into

15 urban and 14 rural districts.[72] In 2022, the city

was selected by the European Commission to be

among the 100 climate-neutral cities, to reach zero

emissions by 2030[73] . [73] Within the INCIT-EV

Project (2020-2024), a huge consortium was working

on implementing and demonstrating smart

bidirectional as well as wireless charging for different

applications and use cases.[74]

SCC Project:

Within the NEUTRALPATH project (2023-2027), the

focus is on creating positive clean energy districts

(PCEDs). In Zaragoza and Dresden, the project aims

at demonstrating the efficiency of PCEDs while

ensuring the replicability of methods, technologies,

and business models in other EU cities (Ghent,

Istanbul, Vantaa).[75] In Zaragoza, the PCDE will be

implemented in the Actur-Rey Fernando district,

including 2 residential and 4 public buildings. The

activities include renovating the buildings by

improving insulation and integrating renewable

energy sources (RES). The latter involves PV

installation and a LowEx District Heating ring through

hydrothermal connection for energy sharing among

buildings. In the field of electromobility, the project

aims to implement V2G chargers with an output of

12.5 kW. This would enable obtaining electricity at the

lowest possible price and feeding it into the grid when

it is most expensive.[76]

Challenges and obstacles:

Trondheim

Trondheim is situated in central Norway by the

Trondheim Fjord and is Norway’s third most populous

city. It is the major public transport and logistics hub

in central Norway and mid-Scandinavia. Trondheim

has a population of about 190,500, with the wider

region exceeding 280,000 inhabitants. The core of the

city has a total urban area of just over 340 km2, with

a population density of 557 per km2. Trondheim is a

rapidly growing city with a low unemployment rate

(2.5%).[79]

SCC Project:

In the +CityxChange project (2018-2023), one of

the objectives was to demonstrate the use of V2G and

V2B related to eMaas.28 According to the Trondheim

eMaaS Demonstration report, 3 core actors could

benefit from EV batteries through V2G charging: The

EV owner (in this case, Zipcar), the building owner

where EVs are connected, and a parking company

that operates the parking spaces on contract with the

local building owner. The solution applied in Brattøra

and Sluppen as part of the +CityxChange project, and

the investment and business models, envisage that

the EV sharing player Zipcar rents the parking spaces

from the building owner, sells electricity/capacity on

the local market, and generates revenue from the

sale of electricity/capacity itself.

Challenges and obstacles:

Due to the technological novelty, there were

considerable hurdles at the beginning of the project,

e.g.:

▪ Technical complexity of integration.

▪ Limited vehicle compatibility.

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) and Vehicle-to-building (V2B) technologies allow interaction and transaction of energy

from a vehicle to the grid, or from a vehicle to a building. V2G supports in balancing the grid and smoothly

integrating renewables, it enables utilities to become less dependent on fossil fuel power plants. Since V2G

solutions are expected to become a financially beneficial feature for utilities, they have a clear incentive to

encourage consumers to take part. Consumers will be rewarded if they make their battery available to the

utility to be used for V2G. This will result in a lower total cost of ownership. V2G helps in the storage of

renewable energy and consuming it again when you feel it is the right moment. With V2G, the momentary

electricity consumption spikes in the building can be balanced with the help of electric cars and no extra energy

needs to be consumed from the grid.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

The main challenges faced by Zaragoza include the

lack of dedicated funding for bidirectional charging

infrastructure, the need to align fleet electrification

with vehicle life cycles, and the critical role of user

acceptance and inter-city collaboration in successfully

scaling e-mobility solutions.

Developments and current situation:

In 2022, the city launched a broad-based initiative to

replace conventional city buses with electric buses (by

adding 68 new vehicles to the fleet). In addition, the

public charging network was extended by installing 37

new charging stations, which increased the number of

charging points from seven to 149.[77] In 2025,

Zaragoza will become a hub for heavy duty charging

due to a joint initiative involving Daimler Trucks,

Traton, and the Volvo Group.[78] The 12.5 kW

bidirectional EV charging points (V2G) are under

development.

▪ Energy market regulations. Norway’s regulatory

framework is still in development.

▪ Difficulty in defining business models due to a

lack of prices or incentives.

Developments and current situation:

Trondheim's experience demonstrates the potential of

integrating V2G technology within urban energy

systems, thereby contributing to grid stability and

sustainability. The city's proactive approach serves as

a model for other municipalities planning to

implement similar initiatives.

3.3 Evaluation of the case studies (cities) per

solution module

The following chapter delves deeper into the findings described in the case study analysis, the latter

being validated by the expert interviews in cities and during the validation workshops.

For this purpose, one interview with a representative of each city was conducted.

During this process, the experts also further explored the reasons behind the implementation

strategies chosen by each city and the underlying business models.

- If success 💪: what was the challenge and how did they tackle it

- If fail ❌: why and how could it be successful

- What was the role of the municipality in being incentivised by the increase in EV adoption at the

city scale?

In a mid-term workshop and a concluding workshop, the results (guidelines) derived from this

information were discussed with a larger group of experts.

The following chapter examines the selected cities per solution module regarding the preselected

success factors. This approach processed information from various sources. This includes project

documents as well as first-hand information from project members and city representatives.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

3.3.1 Charging infrastructure – Public charging system

Aligned with the success factors explained in Chapter 3.1.2, the following table aims to describe the

evaluation of the case studies for the conditions of the Market (M), Customer (C), Technology (T),

and Regulatory (R) for the solution mode “Public charging system”.

Success factors

Stockholm

Vitoria-Gasteiz

Infrastructure

costs

Maintenance

In the case of public charging

infrastructure development, Fortum

and local private partners contributed

capital and operational costs.

2 CPS (7.2 kW each) - budget 7,683

€. Other charging stations from private

operators.

Partnerships

Public and private

investment

PPP between Fortum at that time

(Today, Stockholm cooperates closely

with the grid owner Ellivio).

Fortum installed the chargers (10 AC

and 1 Fast charger).

City of Stockholm: Urban planning,

permitting, coordination, policy

support.

Clear agreements about data

management, maintenance, costs,

and revenues are important.

Involved stakeholders:

City council of Vitoria-Gasteiz

Visesa (public company promoting

quality subsidised housing and carrying

out urban transformation projects).

Giroa-Veolia (a company specialised in

energy and environment management

services.

Coverage

Strategic location

of charging

stations

Demand, physical space, and technical

feasibility were taken into account.

Installation on public ground was

more challenging than on private

ground.

Chargers in public parking lots close to

the city centre and in the facilities of

the companies.

Availability

Usability

Interoperability

Charging points in residential areas

serve users of car-pool services and

smart home applications, along with

the general public.

There is no “one” system in terms of

interoperability.

Parking places in public from private

CPO IBIL.

Charging options

Modular and

scalable

infrastructure

Yes, both AC & DC. Choice depends on

the configuration of the aspects within

the coverage/strategic location of

charging stations

All the chargers AC Mode 3.

Grid connectivity

and integration

Delay of the instalment process due to

a lack of capacity in the network

management company.

Incentives and

subsidies

Grants for local

governments

GrowSmarter total budget: ~€25M;

EU contribution: ~€18.5M

Incentives such as free parking for

electric vehicles or free electricity may

help stimulate markets, but must form

part of coherent long-term strategies

for sustainable urban mobility. The

city itself did not provide any funding,

but operators could apply for state

funding (focused on kilowatt hours per

invested Swedish crown).

395,000€ of EC funding from a

SmartEnCity contribution for the

purchase of e-buses/charging

infrastructure.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

3.3.2 Electrification of fleets – Electric bus system

Aligned with the success factors explained in Chapter 3.1.2, the following table aims to describe the

evaluation of the case studies for the conditions of the Market (M), Customer (C), Technology (T),

and Regulatory (R) for the solution mode “Electric bus system”.

Success factors

Valladolid

Stavanger

Total Cost of

Ownership (TCO)

Initial price of each bus (3) 421,080

€; 40% of the total cost financed by

the EU.

Final proposal from Vectia:

2.095.000€

Buses: 375,000€/bus (5 buses) +

220,000€/charger(2 chargers).

Charging

infrastructure costs

423,500 € [80]

Energy price

Compared to other European

countries, electricity in Spain is

comparatively cheap ~0.24 €/kWh

(2024). [81]

Norway with the cheapest energy

prices in Europe ~0.19 €/kWh (2024).

[81]

Charging

infrastructure

availability

Chargers were developed for the

project (CAF TE designed and

manufactured them). Four fast

charging points for electric buses with

150 kW charging power.

The first bus charging infrastructure

came with e-buses. At that time not

interoperable. Depot charging with

lower charging power (300 kWh

battery, 5h charging duration).

Concession

agreements

Agreement with AUVASA (public

company) that operates as a network

with 22 regular lines and 5 late-night

lines.

Agreement with Kolumbus (public

company) and Norgesbuss as a service

provider.

Customers focus on comfort and

services (punctuality) rather than on

technology.

Real-time

monitoring and

control

Real-time tracking, planning, and user

feedback via digital tools

Kolumbus bus monitoring system

provides open, real-time data. Mixed

fleets are more complicated to operate.

Efficient dispatch

and scheduling

Kolumbus has an efficient real-time

management system in addition to

scheduled services.

Data analytics

and predictive

maintenance (4.2)

Buses introduced the telematic

STRATIO system.

Warranty offered:

General 4 years

Traction battery 5 years

Supercapacitors 5 years

Structure 12 years

Charging stations for 5 years.

Flexible and

scalable design

Charging stations simplify the

scalability of the bus fleet. Hybrid

buses can continue the line without

charge. Buses were able to be

updated to full electric in the future.

There is a general zero-emission

strategy for buses: it uses a mix of

different non-emitting bus types,

including battery electric.

Policy measures

Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan

(SUMP)

Low-Emission Zone (LEZ) strategy

The electric bus transition in Stavanger

is anchored in strong national and

regional policy measures, primarily

Replicating e-mobility solutions

through the Byvekstavtalen (City

Growth Agreement). This agreement

enforces the “zero-growth” traffic

target, requiring that all future

passenger transport growth be

absorbed by public transport, walking,

or cycling. It also mandates the use of

zero-emission buses in scheduled

services, aligning with national climate

goals. These policy commitments are

binding for participating municipalities

and are tied to state funding, ensuring

that climate, land use, and mobility

strategies are implemented in a

coordinated and enforceable way.

Government

subsidies and

incentives

Installation of pantograph charging

stations was funded as part of the

project, covering the additional costs

associated with electric/ hybrid

operation. The electrification of bus

routes included studies and

simulations that were publicly

financed under the REMOURBAN

umbrella.

The electric bus system in Stavanger is

co-financed through

the Byvekstavtalen (City Growth

Agreement), a long-term partnership

between the Norwegian national

government, local municipalities,

and Rogaland County Council, which

owns the public transport agency

Kolumbus. Under this framework, 70%

of funding is provided by the state,

with the remaining 30% covered by

local toll revenues. This agreement

supports procuring zero-emission

buses and related infrastructure as

part of a broader strategy to achieve

zero growth in car traffic and reduce

emissions in the Nord-Jæren region.

Purchasing (NEW)

Purchasing was done using a public

tender that Vectia won.

The public tendering process is

complex and inexperienced. The

provider of the electric bus caused

delays.

3.3.3 Electrification of fleets – Last-mile delivery

Aligned with the success factors explained in Chapter 3.1.2, the following table aims to describe the

evaluation of the case studies for the conditions of the Market (M), Customer (C), Technology (T),

and Regulatory (R) for the solution mode “Last-mile delivery”.

Success factors

Vienna

Nottingham

Micro-hubs and

local warehouses

Vienna Mobile Station opened in

2018 but is not related to Austrian

Post.

Almost three major local

distribution warehouses in Vienna

One e-hub or local consolidation centre

was used to facilitate last-mile deliveries

using small electric vehicles.

Business cases

business model

Delivery of goods in the peripheral

of the city. Based on savings in

energy (-516 kWh/a) and CO2

reduction (758 kg/a – EU).

The project costs of the new e-

transporters are funded to 70 per

cent from the EU budget. [82]

Integration of a distribution centre with e-

mobility to reduce congestion and

emissions in the city centre.

Since 2015, WeGo has been able to add

an express London connection, which

expands the service offering for

customers in Nottingham and the

surrounding region.

Partnerships

Private – Austrian Post

Public/Private contracted to WeGo

Couriers

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Delivery

options/models

Parcel delivery services in

Simmering. The initial idea was to

deliver all types of mail items

throughout the country, but due to

the low range of the vehicles, it

was restricted to the periphery of

the city. The use of e-vehicles in

parcel delivery also poses a

challenge for logistics companies

due to the large parcel volumes

and/or sizes involved. Only a few

e-vans suitable for such operations

were offered.

Transportation of goods in the city centre.

Door-step delivery by various national

carriers.

Residents' acceptance

Residents’ acceptance of Vienna’s

electric last-mile logistics initiatives

proved consistently high and

required no targeted engagement

measures. Neither the deployment

of electric delivery vans nor the

installation of parcel lockers—often

placed within large municipal

housing complexes—generated

notable objections. Instead, lockers

were generally perceived as a

convenient amenity, and growing

parcel volumes substantiated this

positive reception.

No information was found in the

documentation nor received during the

interview or interactions with the city, but

the lack of continuity could suggest a lack

of interest from citizens as well as from

the public and private entities involved.

Data-driven

routing

Data-driven route optimisation was

identified as a critical enabler of

Vienna’s electric last-mile logistics.

Sophisticated routing algorithms

maximised stop density, minimised

vehicle-kilometres and energy use,

and thereby preserved delivery

economics even with higher capital

costs for electric vehicles. This

makes the business case for large-

scale deployment viable without

external incentives.

Smart technology

Advanced “smart” solutions were

largely unnecessary; standard app-

and QR-based locker access met all

operational needs, so scaling

depended more on conventional

processes than on specialised IoT

innovations.

Real-time

monitoring

Real-time data exchanges between

logistics operators and the city

were not implemented; daily

aggregate reports sufficed for

project oversight, while fleet

tracking remained strictly internal.

As a result, real-time monitoring

contributed little if anything to

scaling electric last-mile operations

in partnership with the city;

however, it was crucial for the

economics of the service and

therefore had an impact on the

service provider.

They developed a track-and-trace

software to manage and monitor

deliveries from multiple carriers.

Smart parking

No dedicated smart-parking

measures were introduced; electric

delivery vans relied on the city’s

existing loading zones and standard

curb-side regulations, leaving

Replicating e-mobility solutions

parking innovations with no

discernible impact on the scale-up.

Delivery density

The operational readiness of the

vehicles was limited. The vehicles

could not be used at certain periods

in the winter of 2017 due to the

extremely cold weather conditions.

Last-mile delivery area limited to a small

pedestrian zone in the city centre.

Frameworks

Dedicated regulatory frameworks

were largely absent; Vienna’s

general mobility guidelines

provided background orientation

but did not materially drive or

constrain the expansion of electric

last-mile logistics.

It relied on contracts with Nottingham

City Council and health services.

Public and private

partnerships (see

market)

Between the Vienna City Council

and Austrian Post.

Between the Nottingham city government

and WeGo.

3.3.4 Electrification of fleets – Vehicle-sharing system

Aligned with the success factors explained in Chapter 3.1.2, the following table aims to describe the

evaluation of the case studies for the conditions of the Market (M), Customer (C), Technology (T),

and Regulatory (R) for the solution mode “Vehicle-sharing system”.

Success factors

Amsterdam

Utrecht

Pricing

One of the initial problems was

the cost of the service. Same fee

for all the users within the

cooperative.

The sandbox approach allows

certain freedoms but also

requires early consideration of

the time after the special

regulation expires.

Cost associated with the availability of the

car for utility and V2G.

Business model

Regulatory sandbox approach

allows to operate own micro

grids. 1.4 MWh battery included

in the system.

Frequency Containment Reserve

(FCR) and grid balancing were

intended activities.

Reducing smart grid fees is one

focus to reach economic

efficiency.

Participants in the sharing scheme pay a

fixed amount per month for the possibility

to use a car for a certain number of days

per month. On top of that fixed amount, an

amount is charged per km driven, which

includes charging costs. Public incentives

are, in most cases, necessary for the extra

costs compared to shared fossil cars.

Fleet distribution

eHub concept with electric cars,

(cargo) bikes (total of 17 eHubs

in Amsterdam in 2025)

The Utrecht city council did not decide on

distribution. Only car-sharing companies

decided.

(strategic)

Partnerships

They set up a cooperative which

includes residential users as well

as commercial users.

Focus on building up the entire

ecosystem. Within the setup,

there is a property developer, the

municipality, knowledge

institutes, an energy retailer, and

a solution provider.

The ecosystem is not 100%

complete. It lacks e.g. legal

know-how.

Partnership:

No specific partnership with a shared car

company. It is a public system with

permits.

About the V2G system: Specific partnership

with an innovation partner from chargers,

also system and DSO.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Functionality

The city ran an evaluation on this

with mixed results.

The final customer (car user) doesn't know

that they are using V2G. This should be

made transparent to the user.

Satisfaction

The city ran an evaluation on this

with mixed results.

Station-based system (not floating). In

opposition to customer satisfaction,

because all the cars are in one location and

cannot be left or taken freely.

Accessibility

The organised trial days were

aimed at the shared mobility

experience in the eHUBS

Availability

Initially, the Buiksloterham hub

consisted of 5 electric cars and 7

electric bikes, available

exclusively for the Schoonschip

community.

Project delayed due to the non-availability

of the V2G cars.

26 Hyundai IONIQ5 V2G e-cars.

2 e-vans.

14 V2G e-cars delivered by Renault.

Real-time data and

tracking

A dashboard was set up for

working with data and tracking

developments; it also contains an

application programming

interface (API).

The operators have already largely

implemented this type of solution for the

operational cars.

Local regulations

and licences

A sandbox approach was

approved for 20 years.

Grid congestion regulation in

Netherlands enabled using a

smart charging approach.

The city of Utrecht incentivises the use car

car-sharing systems. The municipality

provides incentives to apply for a double-

parking licence (in districts with paid

parking) for one car for households sharing

in car in adjacent districts.

In these districts, the municipality applies a

lower parking norm (parking space that

needs to be reserved per dwelling) and

actively stimulates the development of

MaaS concepts.

Permits for

infrastructure

City owns most of the land, which

is a major advantage, e.g. for

implementing public charging

infrastructure.

The municipality of Utrecht plays an

important role in its current project to place

150 smart charging stations throughout the

city. This is based on local demand and the

expected steep growth of the number of

electric vehicles in the city.

3.3.5 Vehicle-to-grid – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging

Aligned with the success factors explained in Chapter 3.1.2, the following table aims to describe the

evaluation of the case studies for the conditions of the Market (M), Customer (C), Technology (T),

and Regulatory (R) for the solution mode “Bidirectional electric vehicle charging”.

Success factors

Zaragoza

Trondheim

Energy price

Energy price using dynamic

charge tariffs. Energy

purchase price based on the

contracted rate with the

supplier. The energy selling

price is not yet regulated by

legislation.

The regulatory framework in Norway (and the

EU more broadly) is still evolving to

accommodate distributed energy resources

such as V2G. Lack of clarity on energy pricing,

incentives, and grid feed-in tariffs posed

challenges for business models and return on

investment.

Infrastructure

costs

Bidirectional chargers in

prototype phase by CIRCE, 2

chargers of 25 kW. Non-

market price.

Chargers from ABB were included in the

project (4000 € each). Hyundai provided V2G

chargers compatible with their cars.

Dynamic pricing

models

Dynamic energy purchase

prices will be used so that

proper energy management

can reduce operating costs,

based on

Variable pricing schemes for energy purchase

and sale (V2G), encouraging actions such as

peak shaving through price differences

between charging and discharging times,

Replicating e-mobility solutions

charging/discharging prices

and the local availability of

renewable energy.

especially during periods of highest building

consumption.

User acceptance

User acceptance largely

influence the development of

the bidirectional electric

vehicle charging

implementation. User

acceptance and incentives

are also key to success.

Great user acceptance regarding the use cases

of bidirectional charging technology.

Functionality

Currently, adaptations to

public transport are

envisioned. The city is

supporting the taxi

cooperatives in their

electrification.

It is important that the

current fleet of buses ends

its life cycle to avoid waste.

Initial technical problems (see standardised

communication protocols). Later in the

process, huge progress was made regarding

functionality.

Feed-back

remuneration

Consumers will be rewarded if they make their

battery available to the utility to be used for

V2G. This will lower the total cost of

ownership.

Ease of use incl.

accessibility

RFID cards to identify users

and use the chargers.

Every charger will have two

CCS technology sockets.

Clear concept of how to participate and

experience V2G technology.

Charging and back-

feeding

capacity

50 kW charge/discharge

power. Four-quadrant

operation, which would also

allow for reactive power

management.

Chargers were able to charge/discharge at 11

kW. 50 % of the EV battery total capacity is

used because some EV battery capacity must

remain in order to have a driving range for the

EVs at any time.

Grid connectivity

and integration

V2G facilities are connected to the grid

through the parking areas of buildings

participating in the project. The

parking/building managers are those who

interact with the LFM and ultimately the grid.

Standardised

communication

protocols

ISO 15118 (with EV)

OCPP (with external

backend).

Problems with compatibility between cars and

infrastructure due to the early status of the

ISO15118-20.

Dynamic load

management

The charging/discharging

power of the V2G charger

will be managed to be

adaptable to energy prices,

renewable energy

availability, and grid state.

The V2G chargers at Brattøra and Sluppen are

seamlessly integrated with an energy

management system from ABB. They are also

connected to the power grid, building

automation systems, and other electricity

consumers in the concerned districts, to

optimise the flow of energy.[83]

Frameworks

Optimal charger

management to reduce

energy costs and use

renewable energies.

Due to an innovative project, one of the

missions has been to work in developing

different regulatory frameworks. For example,

local flexibility markets, local energy markets,

and the interaction between the project and

DSO.

Utility collaboration

TrønderEnergi was the local energy utility and

key energy system integrator. They provided

ABB V2G chargers. Also helped with

frameworks and participated in creating local

energy markets where energy prosumers

(buildings, vehicles, etc.) could trade energy

peer-to-peer. Importantly, they also

developed data platforms and services to

monitor, control, and optimise distributed

energy resources.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

3.4 Validation workshops

3.4.1 Onsite workshop – Zaragoza

On 3 July 2025, a dedicated co-creation workshop was held at Etopia, Zaragoza, as part of the

process to develop the “Scalable Cities Guidelines for the Deployment and Upscaling of E-Mobility

Solutions”. The session brought together three representatives from the Scalable Cities

NEUTRALPATH project, alongside members of the BABLE team (Breogan Sanchez) and Fernando

Velázquez.

The workshop aimed to:

■ Validate preliminary findings from the mid-

term study.

■ Capture local knowledge and lived

experience from a Mission City (Zaragoza).

■ Identify enablers, barriers, and scaling

conditions from both project implementation

and policy perspectives.

■ Ensure the guidelines reflect practical,

context-sensitive insights from cities

engaged in real-world transitions.

Key Insights from the Workshop

The discussion was structured yet informal, surfacing

critical and operational reflections around the design,

deployment, and institutional aspects of e-mobility

projects:

Charging infrastructure

■ Cities must balance charging infrastructure with usage behaviour—overbuilding fast chargers

without user demand leads to underperformance and maintenance burden.

■ There is still a lack of clear regulation and ownership for publicly accessible charging points,

especially when operated on municipal land.

■ Municipal fleets can act as a starting point for intelligent charging and V2G pilots, reducing

uncertainty about utilisation patterns.

Public and shared fleets

■ Public fleets (e.g., city-owned vans and buses) are ideal testing grounds for emerging

technologies and data-monitoring frameworks.

■ Fleets must be dimensioned realistically: oversizing or underutilisation risks public pushback.

■ Mixed fleet operation (EV + non-EV) requires clear protocols and training, especially for staff

less familiar with e-mobility systems.

Innovation and governance

■ Local innovation often happens in the absence of national regulation, leading cities to “build

the plane while flying”.

■ City departments need flexibility to adapt procurement and planning processes—standard

procedures rarely fit e-mobility innovation cycles.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

■ Cross-departmental governance is still weak in many cities, especially when projects span

energy, transport, and urbanism units.

Data, monitoring, and decision Support

■ Projects lack common monitoring frameworks, limiting evidence-based scaling or replication.

■ Decision-makers need real-time data on infrastructure usage, which is often fragmented

across providers or departments.

■ There is strong support for developing replicable KPIs and dashboards, especially for

evaluating ROI and user satisfaction.

Business models and funding

■ Cities often rely on fragmented or short-term grants—there is demand for simplified access

to blended financing (e.g., EUCF + national green funds).

■ Partnerships with private operators should include clear revenue-sharing models and

service-level guarantees.

■ Innovation in tariff models (e.g., dynamic pricing or bundling with parking) is still in early

stages.

Citizen acceptance and communication

■ Social acceptance hinges on clear communication of benefits and limitations—not merely

environmental but also practical.

■ Participants noted that early citizen involvement improves both project visibility and user

trust.

■ Equity must be designed into e-mobility—mobility poverty is not solved automatically by

electrification.

Conclusion

The Zaragoza workshop reinforced the insight that while technology readiness is improving, the real

challenges for cities lie in operational governance, financial structuring, and user acceptance. The

reflections from this Mission City provide both cautionary notes and replicable examples for peers

across Europe. These insights have been integrated into the final guidelines to ensure they reflect

both policy ambitions and local realities.

3.4.2 Online final validation workshop

Organised by BABLE Smart Cities on behalf of the Scalable Cities Initiative, this 45-minute

online workshop brought together a selected group of experts and practitioners to validate and fine-

tune the Practical Guidelines for Urban Practitioners to Implement Large-Scale E-Mobility Solutions.

Although some expected participants—including Nuno Moreira (OPT) and Palmira João (City of

Setúbal)—could not attend, their previously shared insights contributed to shaping the workshop

agenda, especially in relation to the monitoring of results and follow-up mechanisms in city contexts.

We were pleased to welcome two experts from the Austrian Institute of Technology (AIT) —

Melina Rosendahl and Anna Kamps — who actively contributed by taking on the role of city

practitioners. Their reflections focused on two main areas:

■ The readability and accessibility of technical descriptions in the guidelines.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

■ The clarity and usability of the Early Barrier Assessment Tool (e-BAT) – explained in

Chapter 4: Guidelines -, particularly regarding how cities interpret and apply its scoring

mechanism.

A broader discussion unfolded around the challenges of initiating and upscaling innovation in

complex urban ecosystems. Participants pointed to:

■ The persistence of institutional silos and the need for stronger cross-departmental

collaboration.

■ The importance of people-centric scaling, highlighting the difficulty of identifying the right

stakeholders across different organisations and ensuring consistent engagement.

■ The influence of work culture and leadership as enablers (or blockers) of transition.

The workshop reaffirmed that for cities to successfully scale e-mobility solutions, it is essential to

design support tools that are simple, intuitive, and sensitive to organisational realities.

These insights will directly inform the final version of the Guidelines to be released under the Scalable

Cities umbrella.

Figure 9: Banner used to promote the validation open workshop

3.5 Insights from the selected SCC cities

The team placed particular emphasis on building meaningful, reflective communication with

cities. The approach went beyond collecting success stories to also explore unsuccessful cases in

detail. The team actively sought to understand why certain initiatives did not succeed, what

business model barriers or operational challenges contributed to failure, and how these challenges

could potentially be addressed or turned around.

In each city interaction, the team consistently asked:

■ When a solution was successful: What was the real challenge, and how was it

overcome?

Replicating e-mobility solutions

■ When a solution failed: Why did it fail, and under what conditions could it have

succeeded?

By focusing on these questions, the team ensured that the guidelines would capture practical,

experience-based insights rather than theoretical assumptions.

In preparing the final document, the team also adapted the style and structure to meet the strict

quality expectations of the reviewing authorities. Special attention was given to:

■ Clarity and logical structure: Every statement is carefully reasoned and supported to

avoid unnecessary clarification requests and to prevent a prolonged review process.

■ Accessibility and practicality: The report deliberately avoids over-scientific language and

focuses on providing tangible, new, and actionable information that cities can apply

directly.

■ Alignment with updated standards: The team was fully aware that, until recently, high-

level research-based reports were acceptable. However, current expectations now demand

practical, detailed, and evidence-backed recommendations.

This approach ensured that the guidelines would serve as a credible, useful, and operational

tool—fully aligned with the needs of both city practitioners and the Scalable Cities review process.

I. Charging

infrastructure

II. Electrification of

fleets

III.Vehicle-to-grid

Public charging system

Stockholm (higher maturity)

Vitoria-Gasteiz (lower maturity)

Electric bus system

Valladolid (lower maturity)

Stavanger (higher maturity)

Bidirectional electric

vehicle charging

Zaragoza (lower maturity)

Trondheim (higher maturity)

Last-mile delivery

Vienna (higher maturity)

Nottingham (lower maturity)

Vehicle-sharing system

Amsterdam (high maturity)

Utrecht (high maturity)

City

Project

Solution module

Focus

Stockholm

GrowSmarter

Public charging

system

Legal and regulatory issues, economic feasibility

and new operating model for success, lessons

learned

Vitoria-

Gasteiz

SmartEnCity

Public charging

system

Grid connectivity and integration, lessons learned

and hurdles

Valladolid

REMOURBAN

Electric bus

system

TCO, technological aspects, lessons learned and

hurdles

Stavanger

Triangulum

Electric bus

system

TCO, charging infrastructure costs, technological

aspects, lessons learned and hurdles

Vienna

Smarter

Together

Last-mile delivery

Overall setting, framework, residents' acceptance,

technological aspects, lessons learned and hurdles

Nottingham

REMOURBAN

Last-mile delivery

Lessons learned and hurdles

Replicating e-mobility solutions

City

Project

Solution module

Focus

Amsterdam

ATELIER

Vehicle-sharing

system

Business models, stakeholder set-up and need for

“third party” (legal), stakeholder engagement

Utrecht

IRIS

Vehicle-sharing

system

Control tools, user experience, bidirectional

solution, framework and lessons learned

Zaragoza

NEUTRALPATH

Bidirectional e-

vehicle charging

With a low maturity level, the conversation will be

more focused on the intentions of the city aligned

with the Mission Cities initiative

Trondheim

+CityxChange

Bidirectional e-

vehicle charging

Dynamic pricing models, grid connectivity and

integration, lessons learned and hurdles

The following tables summarise the description of the meeting and key conclusions/insights

developed there:

Public charging system - Stockholm (higher maturity)

09.05.2025 – Eva Sunnerstedt – Clean Vehicles & Sustainable Transport – Environmental Administration

City of Stockholm

The meeting was conducted online with the participation of Eva Sunnerstedt, Fernando Velazquez,

Gregorio Fernandez and Florian Herrmann. After a short introduction given by Florian about the framing

of the interview, three main aspects were discussed:

1. The identified success factors (see chapter 3.1.2.)

2. The Information gathered for Stockholm related to the success factors (see chapter 3.3.1)

3. Lessons learned and best practices

Main insights:

• The list of identified success factors, as well as the rating, seems fundamentally appropriate from

the Stockholm perspective.

• In addition to the identified factors, “legal and regulatory issues” was added as one of the main aspects

Stockholm had to face in an early phase, e.g. the parking regulations were not compatible with electric

vehicles. In general, there was a huge gap between the technological development and the existing

regulations (technology is there, but it also moves much faster).

o To solve this issue, Stockholm decided to get legal advice by adding persons with considerable

legal know-how to the team.

o There are huge differences if infrastructure is set up on or off the street. If you do it off-street,

it's more up to the person owning the land. You must be very clear to the audience or clear to

the EV drivers what is valid. But if you're on the street, you need to apply with all different

kinds of signing, signage, aspects, etc.

o To deal with these many issues, Stockholm decided to sign access right agreements with

private companies that installed charging at their own expense. One requirement they have to

fulfil is that they need to be in operation at least 95% of the time on a three-month basis.

o The operator covers all the expenses for putting up the charging infrastructure. The city pays

for the signs, the sweeping, and snow ploughing of the streets, as well as for the parking

control.

o The operator obtains the funding directly from the user paying for the electricity. The city gets

the parking fee. In 2024, there were 10 or 11 operators “on street”

o The city also receives (anonymous) data from the operator regarding specific values, such as

usage of the stations.

• When it comes to costs for charging infrastructure, attempts are made to reduce costs, for example,

through

o bundling several works (e.g. laying empty pipes to make later applications possible),

o carefully analysing the grid infrastructure before a decision regarding grid expansion (e.g. for

AC or DC charging) is made; for example, can loads be balanced by other consumers in order

to avoid or minimise costly grid expansions?

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• Regarding developing the charging infrastructure in Stockholm, the aim is to visualise charging locations

to the extent possible.

o Stockholm maps the city to determine where the good locations are – taking into consideration

trees, harbour areas close to the water, and bus/bicycle lanes – and to find good locations for

making charging possible in traffic or city situations.

o The map is online, and any operator receives information on sites “already conducted”,

“reserved”, and “open to reservation”, including detailed access right agreement information

(incl. colour code, requirements an operator has to meet, etc.).

o The result is that most stations are findable and that owners of infrastructure on private

ground have a strong interest in making those sites findable.

• The approach of access right agreements in combination with the mapping is an operating/business

model that suits Stockholm well.

• In addition, Stockholm worked on an information campaign targeting multifamily housing estates, which

was also a success. This included checklist information, brochures, webinars, and seminars. The

operators were also invited. The campaign approach was also copied by other Swedish cities.

• Gaining personal experience with charging and e-mobility is very important even for the staff of the city

if they are to become great ambassadors.

Public charging system – Vitoria-Gasteiz (low maturity)

30.05.2025 – Juan Carlos Escudero – City of Vitoria-Gasteiz - Head of Mobility and Data Science Unit

A call was scheduled with Juan Carlos Escudero Achiaga, Head of Mobility at Vitoria-Gasteiz’s Environmental

Studies Centre. The purpose was to: a) Obtain an overview of the city’s public EV-charging and fleet-

electrification roadmap, and b) Gauge how this roadmap fits the broader Climate-City-Contract (Mission

100) objectives and the city’s unusual challenge of having a high motorisation rate for a non-metropolitan

city.

Main insights:

• The city plans to deploy 343 public charge points by 2025 and to use a multilayer siting method. This

will combine residential density, regulated-parking areas, grid capacity, public-transport stops, and

commercial hotspots to ensure that chargers are both visible and well-used.

• The city is pairing vehicle procurement with depot and terminal charging, committing to 33 battery-

electric buses by 2027 so that public transport decarbonises without service disruption.

• A key objective is to tackle the unusually high car-ownership rate by coupling electrification with

demand-management measures such as super-block expansion, wider walking and cycling networks,

and stricter parking regulation. The goal is that EV growth does not perpetuate car dependency.

• In order to accelerate the electrification of service vehicles and taxis—already 14 % electric—it is

recommended to incentivise easy access to public chargers, viewing this segment as a quick-win

showcase for citizens.

• The aim is to reach ≈10 kt CO₂e avoided by passenger-car electrification and ≈9 kt CO₂e from the e-

bus program—to maintain political backing and funding flows aligned with its Climate-City-Contract.

• One advice is to form joint procurement clubs with peer municipalities to lower the unit cost of chargers

and e-buses and to exchange operational know-how (point raised in the call). Moreover, project

pipelines should be aligned early with national and EU funding windows, noting that external finance

remains the critical bottleneck for staying on schedule (point raised in the call).

Electric bus system – Valladolid (lower maturity)

01.07.2025 – Jesús Alonso – General Manager Solaris group. In the past he participated in Vectia as a project

manager. In 2018, CAF (owner of Vectia) acquired Solaris.

The meeting was conducted by phone, and after Jesús Alonso sent some important information by mail. The

idea of the meeting was to fill in missing information from the REMOURBAN webpage and get personal

insights.

Main insights:

• Jesús provided information about Vectia in the REMOURBAN project, not directly about city council

participation.

• Vectia had no access to the TCO, but the price of the bus was:

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Final bus offer: 2,095,000 €

Buses: 375,000 €/bus (5 buses) + 220,000 €/charging point (2 points)

• Warranty offered to the project, bus, and charger guaranteed the life of the project

o General warranty period: 4 years

o Traction battery warranty period: 5 years

o Ultra capacitator warranty period: 5 years

o Structure warranty period: 12 years

o Charging point warranty period: 5 years

• To help the management of the buses, they have a STRATIO telematics system.

• They did not initially attempt a full electric bus fleet, but the charging station for opportunity

charging allows for easy scalability of the fleet. Hybrid buses can continue running if one of them

fails to charge.

• CAF TE designed the charging station internally. At this time, only ABB and Ekoenergetyka had

similar solutions, yet with a down-up, not up-down, pantograph and with wireless communication.

The solution was innovative because only Volvo had a similar solution with hybrid buses, but it was

too expensive for the city.

• After several years, Valladolid decided to move to electric, and with the disappearance of Vectia

they opened a new tender that Irizar won. The reason for this new investment is that, with

opportunity charging, they can work in the line without problems with the range. Moreover, new

buses can work all day in the line with new batteries.

Electric bus system– Stavanger (higher maturity)

19.06.2025 – Gerd Seehuus – City of Stavanger – Coordinator Mission Cities, Horizon Europe, City of

Stavanger

Online expert call (19 June 2025) between Gerd Seehuus (Rogaland County/Stavanger contact) and

Alexander Schmidt.

Objective: clarify Stavanger’s zero-emission bus roll-out, its dedicated bus-only “Bussveien” corridor, and

the links with harbour electrification and open-data tools, for an EU knowledge-sharing exercise.

Main insights:

• The city recommends pressing ahead with large-scale electrification of its public bus fleet: 152 battery-

electric Yutong buses (articulated and standard) have been ordered through a 2024 global tender and

will enter service on 1 July 2026, covering roughly 38 % of the 400-vehicle county fleet.

• The city recommends staying the course even when electricity prices spike: wholesale power rose from

≈ 0.19 to 6-13 NOK/kWh after installation of new interconnectors, pushing operating costs up 43 % (≈

264 million NOK), but policy makers kept the zero-emission target and retained the order.

• The city recommends pairing fleet purchases with dedicated infrastructure: the dual-lane Bussveien

“Fast Track” bus-only corridor is funded 70 % by the state and30 % by tolls from seven neighbouring

municipalities; its completion has slipped from 2027 to 2032, but it remains the backbone for the new

e-bus fleet.

• The city recommends leveraging synergies with harbour electrification: the public operator Kolumbus

also runs ferries; a Horizon-2020 e-ferry pilot prompted the port to install additional shore-power

(landstrøm) stations and ban cruise ships that cannot plug in, illustrating cross-modal climate action.

• The city recommends providing open, real-time mobility dashboards: under the “Bymiljøpakken” state–

municipal agreement, live bus tracking and mode-share statistics are publicly accessible, though current

budget gaps have frozen further IT development and may trigger staff cuts at Kolumbus.

• The city recommends iterative tendering and detailed specifications: lessons from an initial three-bus

pilot (where weather protection and passenger amenities were missing) were fed into the 2024 tender;

the forthcoming operator contract (2026-2032, with possible two-year extension) embeds charging-

depot requirements and service KPIs.

• The city recommends maintaining a mixed propulsion portfolio for rural reach: while the BRT spine will

be electric, Rogaland will still deploy diesel, CNG, and biogas buses on long inter-urban routes where

range or refuelling logistics favour other fuels.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• The city recommends scrutinising cybersecurity when buying Chinese vehicles: Oslo and Bergen flagged

potential remote-access risks in similar Yutong fleets; Stavanger will monitor software access and data

flows to safeguard operations.

Last-mile delivery – Nottingham (lower maturity)

25.06.2025 – Philip Angus – Head of Nottingham Energy Partnership

The meeting was aimed at understanding both the lessons learned and the hurdles faced during project

development.

Main insights:

• WeGo was discontinued after losing contracts with Nottingham City Council and the health sector,

largely due to public sector budget cuts.

• The business model—based on a central depot for consolidated last-mile delivery—was conceptually

sound but never fully implemented.

• The lack of regulatory support from local authorities limited the ability to enforce consolidated deliveries

in the city.

• National and multinational carriers resisted the model and now justify their operations by switching to

electric vehicles.

• The size of Nottingham’s pedestrian zone and delivery allowances before 10:00 AM reduced the need for

a controlled last-mile solution.

• Successful implementation would have required strict municipal policies limiting access to pedestrian

areas to authorised local operators only.

Last-mile delivery – Vienna (higher maturity)

20.05.2025 – Stephan Hartmann – WieNeu+ City of Vienna – Technical Urban Renewal, Project Manager

The meeting was held with Stephan Hartmann [https://wieneuplus.wien.gv.at/ ] to gather insights on

electric last-mile logistics in Vienna, with a particular focus on the Smarter Together Lighthouse Project

(2016–2021). Stephan led Vienna’s contributions to the project and later continued urban-renewal work

under Wien Neu Plus. The discussion focused on key pilots and lessons learned from the project, broader

developments in urban logistics policy, and reflections on specific success factors relevant to the scaling of

e-logistics initiatives in Vienna.

Main insights:

• Pilot with Austrian Post: In 2017, two retrofitted Iveco e-vans were tested in the Simmering district.

Despite early battery inefficiencies (resulting in slightly worse CO₂ performance than diesel), the pilot

helped Austrian Post adjust operational processes and later scale to hundreds of e-vehicles nationally. It

was described as a “formative apprenticeship phase.”

• Charging infrastructure: While small fleets can charge onsite, Vienna’s transition to large electric fleets

will require shared, high-power charging depots. Stephan emphasised: “Vehicles must come to the

chargers, not every depot to the grid.”

• Parcel locker evolution: Early fragmentation led to many proprietary lockers, but Vienna has since

transitioned to a city-owned, white-label network (WienBox, now relaunched as NextBox). By May 2025,

it will have integrated three major operators with over 720 locker stations in Vienna. Cooperation with

Wiener Wohnen (municipal housing) was key in accelerating deployment and resident acceptance.

• Micro-hubs and consolidation: While earlier attempts at shared hubs (e.g. ThinkPort Vienna) stalled due

to a lack of neutral operators and courier cooperation, recent policies (e.g. Wien-Plan 2035) call for

multi-user hubs and shared logistics infrastructure in urban expansion zones. Regional pilots such as

Central LogPOINT are also advancing the blueprint for urban consolidation.

• Resident acceptance: Stephan reported no resistance to parcel lockers: “Some use it gladly, many are

neutral, nobody is explicitly against it.” Lockers were especially well received in social housing,

reinforcing the importance of public housing partnerships.

• Use of smart technology and data: Route optimization was “core business” for Austrian Post, but the

city received only daily aggregates—no real-time data sharing was needed. Smart features were limited

to standard app/QR code access; advanced IoT or live tracking was not a prerequisite for success.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• Curb and parking management: Though smart e-delivery parking was discussed, no dedicated

measures were implemented. E-vans operated under the same citywide parking and loading zone rules

as any other delivery van. This was not seen as a limiting factor.

• Regulatory frameworks: No dedicated municipal regulation drove the logistics transition. Progress was

instead enabled by voluntary cooperation—especially with public housing—and corporate readiness. The

Fachkonzept Mobilität was noted, but no specific framework was cited as decisive.

• Legacy and scalability: The first WienMobil station (https://www.smartertogether.at/15-millionen-euro/

https://www.smartertogether.at/wienmobil-erweitert-radflotte-um-e-bikes/ ), a multimodal hub

combining bikes, e-cars, and lockers, was developed under Smarter Together. Over 100 stations exist

today, showing broader mobility impact beyond last-mile logistics. Stephan noted that scale came after

internal systems (e.g., routing, admin, charging) were made e-mobility-ready.

Vehicle-sharing system - Amsterdam (higher maturity)

02.06.2025 – Omar Shafqat – Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS/HvA) – Project Manager

ATELIER

The meeting was conducted online with the participation of Omar Shafqat, Fernando Velazquez, Breogan

Sanchez, and Florian Herrmann. After a short introduction given by Florian about the framing

of the interview, three main aspects were discussed:

1. The identified success factors (see chapter 3.1.2.)

2. The Information gathered for Amsterdam related to the success factors (see chapter 3.3.4)

3. Lessons learned and best practices

Main insights:

• Amsterdam has 17 E-hubs, with one specifically within the ATELIER project's site (Schoonschip – a

floating community). These hubs comprise electric cars, bikes, and cargo bikes. The fleet distribution is

managed based on demand, and user data helps adjust the mix of vehicles. A key reference to the hubs

within the project can be found in the ATELIER’s project public deliverable D4.6 – Shared cars platforms

evaluation.

• The project site benefits from a regulatory sandbox, allowing it to operate its own microgrids and

perform behind-the-meter energy optimisation, including smart charging.

o The scheme is being phased out (since 2018), raising questions about the post-exemption of

long-term business models.

o Investments in microgrids and batteries are important for a sustainable business model.

Nevertheless, the long-term viability of business models is not always clear. Continuous

monitoring and adaptation are necessary, especially with fluctuating energy markets.

o One lesson learned was that if capacity sharing between various types of customers is allowed,

it reduces the demand for capacity overall.

• Smart EV charging was addressed within the project, particularly due to significant grid congestion

challenges in the Netherlands. This involves integrating EV chargers into energy management systems

to avoid exceeding grid limits and to reduce grid fees.

o As grid congestion is likely to become prevalent in many other countries, the lessons learned in

managing this challenge (e.g., through smart charging and microgrids) can be useful for other

countries in the future.

• The project involves a diverse set of stakeholders, including property developers, the municipality,

knowledge institutes, energy retailers, and solution providers.

o To overcome, especially the regulatory issues that arise from the complexity of the energy

system, a critical need was identified for a "missing third party" – a professional organisation

to manage the significant administrative and legal complexities of such an ecosystem.

o Mechanisms for stakeholder engagement (Innovation ATELIERs) were developed to address

the challenges that are emerging in the implementation of the project. There are four tracks to

date: mobility and energy, governance and legal, financing, and data commons. This approach

helps to engage both with the Distribution System Operator (DSO) and with the regulator as

well as the ministries.

o Nevertheless, the DSO should have been involved directly from the beginning of the project.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

• Amsterdam's city ownership of most land provides significant agility for implementing and updating

charging infrastructure (e.g., adding smart or bidirectional charging capabilities).

• The project utilised a dashboard for real-time data tracking (KPIs include vehicle numbers, subscriptions,

hub usage, trips, and kilometres) and conducted user surveys and interviews to gather feedback on

functionality, satisfaction, accessibility, and availability.

Vehicle-sharing system - Utrecht (higher maturity)

23.06.2025 – Matthijs Kok – Gemeente Utrecht and Gemeentelijk Projectleider Horizon2020 project IRIS

The meeting was conducted online with the participation of Fernando Velazquez. Due to the short time

available, the discussion focused directly on the three main aspects:

1. The identified success factors (see chapter 3.1.2.)

2. The Information gathered for Utrecht related to the success factors (see chapter 3.3.4)

3. Lessons learned and best practices

Main insights:

• Fleet distribution. Utrecht city council did not decide about the distribution. Only car sharing companies

decided. Utrecht decided on the position of the charging stations. They worked with data modelling and

real-time monitoring to decide where to install chargers.

• Partnership:

o Shared car company. They did not decide on companies. It's a public system with a permit

system allowed by the city council.

o V2G System. Innovation partner from chargers, also system and DSO.

• Car sharing:

o Station-based system (not floating). This is in opposition to customer satisfaction because all

the cars are in one position and not free to leave or get.

o But for V2G stations, the base system is the best way.

o The final customer (car user) doesn't know that they are using V2G. This needs to be made

transparent to the user.

• Realtime

o Operators have this solution in place for the cars.

o There is interoperability between car sharing operators and charging stations.

• Incentives:

o Utrecht city council does not provide money or incentives. They allow the car sharing

companies to do it. These companies facilitate the installation of chargers for operators.

General

o CPOs for standard chargers

o With V2G the companies reduce the invoice of the car bought by more than 50%.

o V2G services

▪ Flexibility or access to the secondary market. Frequency regulation or voltage

regulation.

▪ Dynamic energy prices. Charge at cheaper tariffs and use car batteries as BESS.

Specific new building zones don't have access to enough power; with car sharing

system and V2G they can have power.

Bidirectional electric vehicle charging – Zaragoza (lower maturity)

12.06.2025 – José Alberto Solanas – Head of European Fund Management Department at Zaragoza City

Council

The meeting was conducted online and was aimed both to: a) understand the current status of bidirectional

charging solutions in the city of Zaragoza in the framework of the NEUTRALPATH project, and b) understand

the strategic role of the city towards carbon neutrality (Mission city)

Main insights:

• No bidirectional charging point has been installed in the city because the city is seeking a specific

budget to fund their installation. The city's existing charging stations do not include the option for

Replicating e-mobility solutions

bidirectional charging because the tender for the concession was issued prior to the implementation of

this new solution.

• The ambition of the city of Zaragoza is to reach a 100% e-powered public transport system; the newly

purchased buses are fully electric, and the city is supporting the taxi cooperatives in their electrification.

It is, however, important that the current fleet of buses ends its life cycle and that the useful low-

carbon buses already in place are not wasted.

• Via the NEUTRALPATH project, the city will include a bidirectional charging point in the positive district

(procurement in process).

• In addition to the NEUTRALPATH project, Zaragoza City Council has presented to the European

Commission a project to create a pilot of bidirectional chargers in different areas of the city in order to

better understand the needs of citizens.

• The city recommends strengthening the collaboration between other cities and creating synergies that

help each other in terms of procurement and net-zero strategy.

• The city suggests that user acceptance (rather than infrastructure costs), largely influences the

development of the bidirectional electric vehicle charging implementation. Incentives are also key to

success.

Bidirectional electric vehicle charging – Trondheim (higher maturity)

20.06.2025 – Tom Jensen – Advisor, Unit for Business and Community Development, Trondheim Municipality

The meeting was conducted online and aimed to: a) deepen knowledge about dynamic pricing models and

about grid connectivity and integration (basic aspects pending from the city's preliminary analysis), b)

provide lessons learned and hurdles along the project development.

Main insights:

• In the end, fewer V2G charging points were installed and fewer electric vehicles were acquired than

initially planned, due to various reasons. However, the developments and use cases to be evaluated

were maintained.

• Collaboration among all stakeholders involved in this type of project is essential. In this case, the role of

V2G charger manufacturers and technology providers was particularly important. The development of a

system and a methodology that integrates all stakeholders involved in this type of project is essential,

both during its management and implementation.

• The proposed business model to exploit EV flexibility has been successful: rental car users rent the

vehicle but allow the use of its battery—within set limits—by the owner of the parking facility or building

where it is parked. The price of energy and EV rental are key factors determining the profitability of the

model for all the involved stakeholders.

• Vehicle usage and user – and therefore the time it is parked and the available energy – largely

determine the provision of flexibility. Ideal case: a rental car whose user drives it infrequently and

leaves it parked (for example, at an airport parking lot), making the vehicle available for a long period

of time.

• This business model could be extended to public buses, i.e. using V2G from their batteries while parked

at depots or during other idle periods.

• Energy is very cheap in the country; this model would be even more profitable in scenarios with higher

energy prices or in locations with high grid access costs, poor grid conditions, or where grid expansion

or upgrading is difficult.

• The role of the DSO in this type of project is fundamental.

• One limitation is that in Norway, the vehicle rental market is not very common, which poses a

constraint to the business model.

• Ideal to complement buildings that have local solar generation.

• Ideal for peak shaving of building consumption (associated with the parking facilities).

• Technology always advances faster than regulation and can limit the business model. In the case of this

city, tests were conducted in coordination with the authorities, outside the scope of the applicable legal

framework. This can be a temporary solution, but regulations need to adapt to these new possibilities.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

4. General conclusions

The analysis of 20 Lighthouse and Fellow Cities under the Scalable Cities initiative confirms that e-

mobility is no longer a niche innovation, but a strategic pillar of urban transformation. Despite

growing political will, however, the deployment and scaling of e-mobility solutions remain uneven

across Europe, hindered by fragmented governance, limited institutional capacity, infrastructure

gaps, and insufficient public engagement.

A key insight from this study is that success in e-mobility implementation depends less on technology

availability and more on a city’s ability to coordinate stakeholders, align regulations, and build public

trust. Cities that have successfully scaled solutions—such as Amsterdam, Vienna, or Trondheim—do

so through deliberate planning, agile governance, inter-city collaboration, and sustained political

support.

The development of this practical guideline set responds to a direct demand from cities: the need

for actionable, context-sensitive support. By combining policy analysis, stakeholder feedback, and

replicable good practices, the guidelines bridge the gap between experimentation and

institutionalisation. The focus on five key e-mobility solutions enables cities to better prioritise high-

impact interventions while tailoring them to local conditions.

Recommendations for next steps

■ Institutionalise replication support at the regional or national level: Just as local innovation

can drive change, regional and national bodies should act as facilitators—offering legal

frameworks, procurement templates, and access to funding for smaller municipalities.

Consider replicating support models used in the Nordic or German ecosystems.

■ Create a living repository of e-mobility deployment cases: Build upon this work by launching

a dynamic, open-access platform to continuously document and update real-world

implementation experiences, including procurement documents, tender references, and

lessons learned.

■ Strengthen capacity-building mechanisms: Develop training programs and communities of

practice targeting municipal staff, local utilities, and mobility planners. These should be

aligned with tools such as the e-BAT and the six-step roadmap. This mirrors successful

knowledge transfer mechanisms from projects such as CIVITAS and NetZeroCities.

■ Support cross-city collaboration on shared challenges: Foster partnerships between cities at

similar stages of maturity or facing common barriers (e.g., bidirectional charging, fleet

electrification) to co-develop joint approaches. Models such as the EU Mission Cities’ twinning

learning programme can serve as a blueprint.

■ Promote EU-level incentives for integration and innovation: Encourage funding programs

such as Horizon Europe, EUCF, and CEF to prioritise integrated urban e-mobility projects

that combine technology, citizen engagement, and energy systems—bridging mobility and

climate-neutrality agendas.

■ Monitor, evaluate, and refine the guidelines: Treat these guidelines as a living document, to

be periodically updated with feedback from cities and evolving best practices. A structured

feedback loop—supported by interviews, workshops, or surveys—should be integrated into

the future roadmap.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

5. Bibliography

[1] European Commission (2019). The European Green Deal. [Online]. Available:

https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-

deal_en

[2] European Commission. Transport and the Green Deal. In: The European Green Deal.

[Online]. Available: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-

2024/european-green-deal/transport-and-green-deal_en

[3] European Environment Agency. EEA report confirms: electric cars are better for the climate

and air quality. [Online]. Available: https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/eea-report-

confirms-electric-cars [Accessed April 2025].

[4] McKinsey & Company. Europe’s economic potential in the shift to electric vehicles. [Online].

Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-

insights/europes-economic-potential-in-the-shift-to-electric-vehicles [Accessed April 2025].

[5] International Energy Agency (IEA). Global EV Outlook 2024: Trends and developments in

electric vehicle markets, charging infrastructure and policies. Paris: IEA, 2024. Available at:

https://www.iea.org/energy-system/transport/electric-vehicles

[6] Exro Technologies Inc. Barriers to Electric Vehicle Adoption in 2022. Exro, 2022. [Online].

Available: https://www.exro.com/industry-insights/barriers-to-electric-vehicle-adoption-in-

2022 [Accessed April 2025].

[7] Apurva Pamidimukkala, Sharareh Kermanshachi, Jay Michael Rosenberger, Greg Hladik.

Evaluation of barriers to electric vehicle adoption: A study of technological, environmental,

financial, and infrastructure factors. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives.

Volume 22, 2023, 100962, ISSN 2590-1982

[8] Alanazi, F. (2023). Electric Vehicles: Benefits, Challenges, and Potential Solutions for

Widespread Adaptation. Applied Sciences, 13(10), 6016.

https://doi.org/10.3390/app13106016

[9] Jayabalan, S. K., Albusaidi, A. S. O., Negi, G. S., Iqbal, M. I., & Abdulqader, H. A. (2024).

Consumer acceptance, social behaviour, driving, and safety issues regarding electric vehicles

in Oman. World Electric Vehicle Journal, 15(12), 549.

https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj15120549

[10] Ozercan, Yusuf Ercan. Electric Vehicles as Flexibility Resources: A Regulatory Challenge for

the European Union. Figshare, 2025. DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28543625.v1

[11] European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS). (2024). The future of European electric

vehicles, PE 762.873.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2024/762873/EPRS_IDA(2024)762

873_EN.pdf

[12] International Energy Agency (IEA). (2025). Global EV Outlook 2025: Electric Vehicle

Charging. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2025/electric-vehicle-

charging

Replicating e-mobility solutions

[13] International Energy Agency (IEA). (2025). Global stock of public charging points by region,

2018–2024. IEA, Paris. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/global-stock-of-

public-charging-points-by-region-2018-2024.

[14] European Environment Agency (EEA). (2023). Electric vehicles from life cycle and circular

economy perspectives. EEA Report No 20

[15] European Environment Agency (EEA). (2024). Greenhouse gas emission intensity of

electricity generation – country level. [Online]. Available:

https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/greenhouse-gas-emission-intensity-of-

1/greenhouse-gas-emission-intensity-of-electricity-generation-country-level [Accessed

April 2025].

[16] EV Database. (2024). Energy consumption of electric cars – Cheatsheet. [Online]. Available:

https://ev-database.org/cheatsheet/energy-consumption-electric-car [Accessed April

2025].

[17] International Energy Agency (IEA). (2024). EV Life Cycle Assessment Calculator. [Online].

Available: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/ev-life-cycle-assessment-

calculator [Accessed April 2025].

[18] Ernst & Young. (2024). Conflicting Objectives in the Green Transition: SE-TRAFFIC Report –

UK Version 1.1. August 2024. EY.

[19] International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). (2019). Innovation Outlook: Smart

Charging for Electric Vehicles. Abu Dhabi. [Online]. Available: https://www.irena.org/-

/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/Sep/IRENA_EV_Smart_Charging_2019.pdf

[Accessed April 2025].

[20] S. Deb, M. Pihlatie and M. Al-Saadi, "Smart Charging: A Comprehensive Review," IEEE

Access, vol. 10, pp. 134690–134703, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3227630.

[21] Brinkel, N., van Wijk, T., Buijze, A. et al. Enhancing smart charging in electric vehicles by

addressing paused and delayed charging problems. Nat Commun 15, 5089 (2024).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-48477-w

[22] P. V. Dahiwale, Z. H. Rather and I. Mitra, "A Comprehensive Review of Smart Charging

Strategies for Electric Vehicles and Way Forward," in IEEE Transactions on Intelligent

Transportation Systems, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 10462-10482, Sept. 2024, doi:

10.1109/TITS.2024.3365581

[23] EVBox. (n.d.). Dynamic Load Balancing for EV charging explained. [Online]. Available:

https://blog.evbox.com/dynamic-load-balancing [Accessed April 2025].

[24] Singh, A.R., Kumar, R.S., Madhavi, K.R. et al. Optimising demand response and load

balancing in smart EV charging networks using AI AI-integrated blockchain framework. Sci

Rep 14, 31768 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-82257-2

[25] C. Boodoo, "Optimising grid performance in Trinidad and Tobago: The role of vehicle-to-grid

(V2G) technology," European Journal of Energy Research, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 36–43, 2024.

[26] Meyer, D., & Wang, J. (2018). Integrating ultra-fast charging stations within the power grids

of smart cities: A review. IET Smart Grid, 1(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-

stg.2018.0006

Replicating e-mobility solutions

[27] Zheng Y, Keith DR, Wang S, Diao M, Zhao J. Effects of electric vehicle charging stations on

the economic vitality of local businesses. Nat Commun. 2024;15:7437. doi:10.1038/s41467-

024-51554-9

[28] H. Hõimoja, M. Vasiladiotis, S. Grioni, M. Capezzali, A. Rufer, y H. B. Püttgen, “Toward

Ultrafast Charging Solutions of Electric Vehicles,” en Proc. 44th Int. Conf. Large High Voltage

Electric Systems (CIGRÉ), París, Francia, 2012, pp. 1–8.

[29] MG Motor UK, “What are EV charging apps and how do they work,” MG Motor UK Blog.

[Online]. Available: https://www.mg.co.uk/blog/what-are-ev-charging-apps-and-how-do-

they-work. [Accessed April 2025].

[30] C. Pillot, The Rechargeable Battery Market and Main Trends 2020–2030, Avicenne Energy,

Lyon, France, Sep. 29, 2021.

[31] BloombergNEF, “Battery Price Survey,” BloombergNEF, New York, NY, USA, Nov. 26, 2023.

[Online]. Available: https://about.bnef.com/insights/clean-energy/lithium-ion-battery-

pack-prices-hit-record-low-of-139-kwh. [Accessed: April 2025].

[32] P. Albertus, S. Babinec, S. Litzelman, and A. Newman, “Status and challenges in enabling

the lithium metal electrode for high‑energy and low‑cost rechargeable batteries,” Nature

Energy, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 16–21, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1038/s41560-017-0047-2

[33] L. Gaines, “Lithium-ion battery recycling processes: Research towards a sustainable course,”

Sustainable Materials and Technologies, vol. 17, Sep. 2018, doi:

10.1016/j.susmat.2018.e00068

[34] A. Ghosh et al., “AI-enabled Battery Management Systems for Electric Vehicles,” IEEE

Access,

[35] G. Harper, R. Sommerville, E. Kendrick, L. Driscoll, P. Slater, R. Stolkin, A. Walton, P.

Christensen, O. Heidrich, S. Lambert, A. Abbott, K. Ryder, L. Gaines, y P. Anderson,

“Recycling lithium‑ion batteries from electric vehicles,” Nature, vol. 575, no. 7781, pp. 75–

86, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1682-5.

[36] Sustainable Bus, “ATM Milano: 1,200 electric buses,” Sustainable Bus, [Online]. Available:

https://www.sustainable-bus.com/news/atm-milano-electric-buses/ . [Accessed: April

2025].

[37] Smart Cities Marketplace, “Smarter Together – Vienna Pilot,” European Commission – Smart

Cities Marketplace, [Online]. [Online]. Available: https://smart-cities-

marketplace.ec.europa.eu/projects-and-sites/projects/smarter-together . [Accessed April

2025].

[38] Stardust Project, “Feasibility study in recharging e-cars,” Stardust H2020 Project. [Online].

Available: https://stardustproject.eu/news/feasibility-study-in-recharging-e-cars/.

[Accessed April 2025].

[39] Stardust Project, “Mobility, safety and waste collection,” Stardust H2020 Project, [Online].

Available: https://stardustproject.eu/pilots/mobility-safety-and-waste-collection /.

[Accessed: April 2025].

[40] Smart Cities Marketplace, “Milan Pilot – Smart Cities Marketplace,” European Commission –

Smart Cities Marketplace. [Online]. Available: https://smart-cities-

marketplace.ec.europa.eu/projects-and-sites/projects/milan-pilot . [Accessed April 2025].

Replicating e-mobility solutions

[41] CORDIS, “Glasgow case study on implementing e-vehicle solutions,” CORDIS – EU Research

and Innovation, [Online]. Available: https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/415394-glasgow-

pushes-on-with-implementation-of-smart-and-sustainable-solutions-in-european-

project#:~:text=upscale%20the%20solutions%20implemented,These%20intelligent%20st

reetlights%20are [Accessed April 2025].

[42] Sustainable‑Bus.com, “27 European cities are targeting ZE fleets by 2025 or 2030, T&E

found” Sustainable‑Bus.com, [Online]. Available: https://www.sustainable-

bus.com/news/27-europe-cities-target-zero-emission-bus-fleet-

2030/#:~:text=Such%20forecast%20highlights%2C%20in%20T%26E,buses%20as%20e

arly%20as%202027 . [Accessed April 2025].

[43] Smart Cities Marketplace, “Integrated Urban Planning in Gothenburg,” Smart Cities

Marketplace, European Commission, [Online]. Available: https://smart-cities-

marketplace.ec.europa.eu/projects-and-sites/projects/iris/iris-

gothenburg#:~:text=2,integrated%20urban%20planning%20methods%20and [Accessed

April 2025].

[44] Triangulum, “Norway case study in Triangulum,” Triangulum – Smart City Lighthouse

Projects, [Online]. Available: https://triangulum.no [Accessed April 2025].

[45] World Economic Forum, Scaling Investment in EV Charging: A Policy Roadmap for Cities,

White Paper, 26 Sep. 2024. [Online]. Available:

https://www.weforum.org/publications/scaling-investment-in-ev-charging-a-policy-

roadmap-for-cities/. [Accessed July 2025].

[46] Jac McCluskey, Tom Druitt, Charles Larkin, Sustainability in transit: Assessing the economic

case for electric bus adoption in the UK, Transport Policy, Volume 162, 2025, Pages 493-

508, ISSN 0967-070X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2024.12.019

[47] EY Sweden, “Conflicting objectives in the green transition: An impact analysis of a scenario

excluding the import of electric buses and batteries to the European market,” VTI report

no. 293861, 2024.

[48] A. McCready, “Two Urban Logistics solutions for the last‑mile delivery problem,” ULaaDS –

Urban Logistics as an on‑Demand Service, 21 Mar. 2025. [Online]. Available:

https://ulaads.eu/two-urban-logistics-solutions-for-the-last-mile-delivery-problem/ .

[Accessed July 2025].

[49] Stockholm City Council, Statistik och fakta om Stockholm: Befolkningsprognos, Stockholm,

Sweden. [Online]. Available: https://start.stockholm/om-stockholms-stad/utredningar-

statistik-och-fakta/statistik/befolkning/ . [Accessed July 2025].

[50] Region Stockholm, Befolkningsökningen bedöms bli mindre visar årets prognos, Stockholm,

Sweden. [Online]. Available: https://www.regionstockholm.se/statistik-och-

fakta/befolkning/ingang-1234/ . [Accessed July 2025].

[51] Smart Cities Marketplace, “Stockholm as lighthouse city,” Grow Smarter, European

Commission. [Online]. Available: https://grow-smarter.eu/lighthouse-cities/stockholm /.

[Accessed July 2025].

[52] Swedish Transport Agency and Stockholm City Council, Elbilsstatistik, Stockholm, Sweden.

[Online]. Available: https://www.transportstyrelsen.se . [Accessed July 2025].

[53] E. Sunnerstedt, “EV Charging in Stockholm,” presentation, Stockholm, Sweden, Apr. 2025.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

[54] City of Vitoria-Gasteiz, Datos Estadísticos de Vitoria-Gasteiz, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain.

[55] SmartEnCity Project, SmartEnCity – Integrated Urban Planning, Horizon 2020. [Online].

Available: https://smartencity.eu [Accessed July 2025].

[56] Swedish Transport Agency and Stockholm City Council, “Elbilsstatistik,” Transportstyrelsen

– Vehicle Traffic Statistics, [Online]. Available: https://www.transportstyrelsen.se/statistik-

/statistik-inom-vagtrafik/ (or the specific EV statistics subpage) [Accessed July 2025].

[57] Ayuntamiento de Vitoria‑Gasteiz, “Estadísticas de vehículo: Aumenta el número de vehículos

en Vitoria‑Gasteiz; los ECO y 0 son solo el 5 % del total,” Gasteiz Hoy, Natxo Gatón, 27

Mar. 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.vitoria-

gasteiz.org/wb021/was/we001Action.do?idioma=es&accionWe001=adjunto&nombre=84558.pdf

[Accessed July 2025].

[58] Ayuntamiento de Vitoria‑Gasteiz, [Online]. Available: https://www.vitoria-

gasteiz.org/wb021/was/we001Action.do?idioma=es&accionWe001=adjunto&nombre=84558.pdf

[Accessed July 2025].

[59] N. Gatón, “Aumenta el número de vehículos en Vitoria-Gasteiz: los ECO y 0 son solo el 5 %

del total,” Gasteiz Hoy, 27 Mar. 2025. [Online]. Available:

https://www.gasteizhoy.com/aumenta-el-numero-de-vehiculos-en-vitoria-gasteiz-los-eco-

y-0-son-solo-el-5-del-total/. [Accessed July 2025].

[60] Electromaps, “Map of charging stations and charging points for EV,” Electromaps, [Online].

Available: https://www.electromaps.com. [Accessed July 2025].

[61] REMOURBAN Project, “Lighthouse Cities list,” REMOURBAN, [Online]. Available:

http://www.REMOURBAN.eu/cities/lighthouse-cities/lighthouse-cities.kl . [Accessed:

Jul. 23, 2025].

[62] REMOURBAN Project, “Expected results – Valladolid,” REMOURBAN, [Online]. Available:

http://www.REMOURBAN.eu/cities/lighthouse-cities/valladolid/expected-results.kl (see

expected results section). [Accessed July 2025].

[63] World Population Review, “Vienna Population 2025,” World Population Review, [Online].

Available: https://worldpopulationreview.com/cities/austria/vienna . [Accessed: July 2025].

[64] E. Butler, “Austrian Post: city logistics of the future needs smart and, above all, green

solutions,” Post & Parcel, 14 Dec. 2023. [Online]. Available:

https://postandparcel.info/154690/news/e-commerce/austrian-post-city-logistics-of-the-

future-needs-smart-and-above-all-green-solutions/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[65] Total Population, “Nottingham Population (2025),” Total Population, 16 Jan. 2025. [Online].

Available: https://totalpopulation.co.uk/authority/nottingham. [Accessed: July 2025].

[66] Rexel UK Ltd, “Rexel supports sustainability with electric vans,” LinkedIn, 15 Feb. 2024.

[Online]. Available: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rexel-uk-ltd_rexel-sustainability-

evvans-activity-7280908265540993025-E778/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[67] West Bridgford Wire, “Electric delivery bikes will be on Nottingham streets soon,” West

Bridgford Wire, 21 May 2020. [Online]. Available: https://westbridgfordwire.com/electric-

delivery-bikes-will-be-on-nottingham-streets-soon/. [Accessed: July 2025].

Replicating e-mobility solutions

[68] Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, “CBS Open Data Portal,” CBS Open Data, [Online].

Available: https://opendata.cbs.nl/#/CBS/nl/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[69] City of Amsterdam, “Shared cars,” Traffic & Transport – Shared Mobility, City of Amsterdam,

[Online]. Available: https://www.amsterdam.nl/en/traffic-transport/shared-

mobility/shared-cars/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[70] Municipality of Utrecht, Dept. of Research & Advice, “Bevolkingsprognose 2025,” Onderzoek

& Cijfers – Gemeente Utrecht, 25 Jun. 2025. [Online]. Available:

https://www.utrecht.nl/bestuur-en-organisatie/publicaties/onderzoek-en-

cijfers/onderzoek-over-utrecht/bevolkingsprognose. [Accessed: July 2025].

[71] R. Berg, “Renault 5,” LinkedIn, 16 May 2025. [Online]. Available:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/robin-berg-030v2g_renault5-activity-

7318194970627063810-HKFG/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[72] Ayuntamiento de Zaragoza, Capítulo 4. Estructura territorial y demográfica de Zaragoza,

Zaragoza, Spain, Apr. 2025. [Online]. Available:

https://www.zaragoza.es/contenidos/bici/plan/CAPITULO04.pdf. [Accessed: July 2025].

[73] Zaragoza City Council, “Green mobility and clean energy: Zaragoza puts itself on the

international map of urban innovation,” Go Aragón, 19 Jul. 2022. [Online]. Available:

https://www.goaragon.eu/green-mobility-and-clean-energy-zaragoza-puts-itself-on-the-

international-map-of-urban-innovation/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[74] CIRCE – Technology Centre, “INCIT-EV,” CIRCE Projects, Jan. 2020–Jun. 2024. [Online].

Available: https://www.fcirce.es/en/project/incit-ev. [Accessed: July 2025].

[75] European Commission, “Pathway towards Climate-Neutrality through low-risk and fully

replicable Positive Clean Energy Districts (NEUTRALPATH),” CORDIS, Grant agreement

101096753, Jan. 1, 2023–Dec. 31, 2027. [Online]. Available:

https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101096753. [Accessed: July 2025].

[76] NEUTRALPATH, “Zaragoza implements its Positive Clean Energy District in the Actur Rey

Fernando district,” NEUTRALPATH – Cities, [Online]. Available:

https://NEUTRALPATH.eu/city/zaragoza/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[77] Zaragoza City Council, “Green mobility and clean energy: Zaragoza puts itself on the

international map of urban innovation,” Go Aragón, 19 Jul. 2022. [Online]. Available:

https://www.goaragon.eu/green-mobility-and-clean-energy-zaragoza-puts-itself-on-the-

international-map-of-urban-innovation/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[78] Pledge Times, “Zaragoza will host the first charging centre in Spain for heavy electric vehicles

from Daimler Truck, Traton and Volvo Group,” Pledge Times, 22 Nov. 2024. [Online].

Available: https://pledgetimes.com/zaragoza-will-host-the-first-charging-centre-in-spain-

for-heavy-electric-vehicles-from-daimler-truck-traton-and-volvo-group/. [Accessed: July

2025].

[79] Trondheim.com, “Trondheim – official visitor’s guide,” [Online]. Available:

https://www.trondheim.com/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[80] Ayuntamiento de Valladolid, “AUVASA incorpora a su flota tres nuevos vehículos híbridos

diésel-eléctrico,” Valladolid.es, 30 Aug. 2021. [Online]. Available:

https://www.valladolid.es/es/actualidad/noticias/auvasa-incorpora-flota-tres-nuevos-

vehiculos-hibridos-diese. [Accessed: July 2025].

Replicating e-mobility solutions

[81] “Electric costs: Spain 14th cheapest in Europe,” Spanish Solicitors, May 2025. [Online].

Available: https://spanishsolicitors.com/electric-costs-spain-14th-cheapest-in-europe.

[Accessed: July 2025].

[82] Logistik Express, “Eco parcel logistics by Austrian Post in Vienna-Simmering,”

Logistik Express, Mar. 16, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.logistik-express.com/eco-

parcel-logistics-by-austrian-post-in-vienna-simmering/. [Accessed: July 2025].

[83] ABB, “ABB in ground‑breaking pilot with electric vehicles (EV) as power banks in Trondheim,”

ABB News, Fornebu, Norway, 22 Feb. 2022. [Online]. Available:

https://new.abb.com/news/detail/88086/abb-in-ground-breaking-pilot-with-electric-

vehicles-ev-as-power-banks-in-trondheim . [Accessed: July 2025].

[84] Kroeze, Jan & Mashau, Lawrence. (2024). A Readiness Assessment Tool for Smart City

Implementation in Small and Rural Municipalities. Journal of Information Systems and

Informatics. 6. 2937-2964. 10.51519/journalisi.v6i4.937.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Annex: Guidelines for city practitioners on

how to enable and upscale e-mobility

solutions

This is a practical guide to help cities deploy and scale e-mobility solutions with step-by-step

processes, risk assessment tools, and ready-to-use replication templates. A turn-key document/tool

designed to facilitate the deployment of “realistic” large-scale e-mobility solutions.

The successful replication and scaling of e-mobility solutions across Europe requires more than

technological readiness—they demand context-sensitive strategies that account for the diverse

political, economic, and infrastructural realities of European cities. While numerous pilot initiatives

and demonstration projects under the Smart Cities and Communities (SCC) framework have

generated valuable lessons and technical progress, many urban practitioners still face significant

challenges when moving from innovation to large-scale implementation. To bridge this gap, cities

need structured, evidence-based guidance that transforms these pilot experiences into actionable,

locally adaptable solutions.

4.1 Introduction

The purpose of these guidelines is to provide practical, action-

oriented support to cities aiming to deploy and scale large-

scale e-mobility solutions. Unlike traditional high-level reports,

these guidelines offer cities a shortcut to implementation—a

combination of step-by-step process guidance, a practical barrier

assessment tool, and ready-to-use factsheets tailored to

different e-mobility solutions.

The guidelines address the need for tangible tools, based on

city-to-city recommendations, that help cities navigate

complex challenges such as procurement, stakeholder

engagement, investment planning, and regulatory alignment. By

incorporating real-life insights from cities across Europe,

the document not only summarises technical best practices but

also offers templates and examples that are directly applicable.

The guidelines emphasise the importance of supporting smaller

municipalities through collaboration with metropolitan or

regional entities that can provide procurement templates, legal

references, and technical support.

Ultimately, this document is designed to help cities move

quickly from planning to action, providing a structured but

adaptable pathway to replicate proven e-mobility solutions and

avoid common pitfalls.

This guideline focuses on five e-mobility solutions identified

as the most impactful, replicable, and widely applicable across

European cities.

Public charging system: Deploying accessible and well-planned public charging stations is essential

to encourage electric vehicle uptake. Without public charging, cities cannot support wide adoption

beyond private home charging. This solution is foundational and highly replicable, offering cities a visible

and scalable entry point into e-mobility.

Electric bus systems: Electrifying bus fleets provides a powerful, city-led strategy to reduce emissions

and improve air quality. Public buses operate on predictable routes, making them ideal for planned

(e-BAT) Barrier

Assessment Tool

Six-step process

Solution

factsheets

Local

implementation

Diagnose Plan

Engage Pilot selection

Invest Monitor

Replicating e-mobility solutions

electrification. This solution is widely promoted by EU policies and has proven cost benefits over the

vehicle lifecycle.

Last-mile delivery: Electrifying last-mile delivery fleets is critical to tackling emissions from growing

e-commerce and urban freight. Cities can enable this transition by setting low-emission zones and

providing dedicated urban logistics spaces, which drive private sector adoption while reducing

congestion and pollution.

Vehicle-sharing systems: Shared electric mobility options, such as e-car sharing and e-bike systems,

can help reduce private car ownership and complement public transport. These systems are easy to

replicate and scale, offering flexible mobility alternatives that improve urban accessibility and reduce

traffic.

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G): V2G technology allows electric vehicles to feed energy back to the grid,

supporting renewable integration and grid stability. This emerging solution offers a future-oriented

innovation pathway, especially for cities managing public or company fleets, and strengthens the link

between mobility and energy systems.

These solutions address key urban mobility needs while supporting climate goals and improving

quality of life. Their selection is based on:

■ Their maturity and availability in the market.

■ Their proven ability to be scaled and adapted to diverse local contexts.

■ The clear challenges and enablers identified in multiple Smart Cities and Communities (SCC)

projects.

The guidelines aim at bridging the gap between innovation and implementation by facilitating the

development of e-mobility solutions from referenced projects, and especially from the success and

failure stories gathered from the implementers (pilots, living labs, etc). The guidelines are designed

for 3 types of practitioners:

■ Cities seeking to provide helpful knowledge to enable the implementation and upscaling of

e-mobility solutions,

■ The European smart city community (including European projects and initiatives such as

NetZeroCities, European City Facility, Smart Cities Marketplace),

■ Researchers and SME supporting cities in the implementation and upscaling of e-mobility

solutions.

This guide supports city practitioners and stakeholders across Europe to overcome barriers to e-

mobility implementation and scale-up, leverage validated success factors across technological,

regulatory, financial, and behavioural dimensions, replicate proven e-mobility solutions tailored to

local contexts, and make use of EU frameworks, funding, and peer experiences from Lighthouse and

Follower Cities.

4.2 Key barriers to upscale e-mobility solutions

Upscaling e-mobility across European cities faces several challenges. These barriers are interlinked

and manifest themselves differently depending on the local context, market maturity, and policy

environment. Based on the findings of the state-of-the-art review and city case studies, the primary

obstacles can be categorised into Technical, Economic, Regulatory, Social/Behavioural, and

Operational barriers.

To support cities and stakeholders in proactively addressing the challenges outlined above, this guide

includes a practical Early Barrier Assessment Tool (e-BAT), developed by the five main authors

Replicating e-mobility solutions

of the present report and adapted to the success factors and the five e-mobility solutions

abovementioned, aiming at offering a simple, replicable framework that helps local authorities,

project developers, and supporting practitioners quickly diagnose potential obstacles — whether

technical, economic, regulatory, social, or operational — before committing to large-scale

deployment of e-mobility solutions.

The e-BAT consists of a checklist-based self-assessment matrix. [84] , organised around the five

abovementioned key barrier categories, and can be used to flag early risks, prioritise areas for

intervention, and guide tailored planning and resource allocation. By encouraging structured

reflection and internal dialogue, it helps to ensure that solutions are matched to local capacity, policy

environments, and user needs—ultimately making replication more realistic and impactful.

(1 = Not in place, 2 = In place to some extent, 3 = Almost fully in place, 4 = Fully in place).

Technical

Indicator

Description

Score

(1-4)

Notes

Grid readiness

Is the local grid capacity sufficient for scaling EV-related

infrastructure (charging, depots, V2G, etc.)?

Charging infrastructure

availability

Are charging points (public or fleet) accessible and

adequately distributed to serve intended users?

Technology compatibility

Are vehicles, chargers, and management systems

interoperable and compatible with common standards?

Data and monitoring

systems

Are real-time monitoring tools or smart systems in place to

manage energy, vehicles, or operations?

Installation, maintenance

and technical support

Is there adequate technical expertise or service capacity to

install, maintain, and repair systems?

Economic

Indicator

Description

Score

(1-4)

Notes

Initial investment

availability

Is municipal, national, or private funding available for

upfront infrastructure and/or vehicle costs?

Access to external

financing

Are there accessible EU, national, or third-party funding

mechanisms (e.g. loans, PPPs, green bonds)?

Total cost of ownership

competitiveness

Are e-mobility solutions economically viable over their

lifecycle compared to traditional or new alternatives?

Business model viability

Are there clear, sustainable business models for operations,

maintenance, and long-term scaling?

Private sector

engagement

Is there demonstrated interest or participation from local

businesses or mobility/energy operators?

Regulatory

Indicator

Description

Score

(1-4)

Notes

Permitting and planning

framework

Are planning, zoning, or permitting procedures clear and

supportive of EV-related infrastructure and services?

Standardisation and

interoperability

requirements

Do regulations promote the use of common technical

standards (e.g. ISO 15118, IEC61851, OCPP) for seamless

service delivery?

Market access and

procurement rules

Do public procurement, concession, or licensing rules enable

fair access for EV-related technologies and services?

Energy and grid

regulation alignment

Are regulatory frameworks in place to enable energy

services such as V2G, dynamic pricing, or load

management?

Alexander Schmidt and Breogan Sanchez (BABLE Smart Cities), Florian Herrmann (Lindholmen Science

Park), and Gregorio Fernandez and Fernando Velazquez (No affiliation)

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Incentives and policy

stability

Are there supportive policies (subsidies, tax breaks,

emission zones) with long-term consistency to encourage

investment?

Social/Behavioural

Indicator

Description

Score

(1-4)

Notes

Public awareness and

acceptance

Is the local population informed about and generally

supportive of e-mobility adoption?

User confidence and

familiarity

Are citizens and stakeholders comfortable with using EVs or

digital services (e.g. booking apps, V2G)?

Behavioural incentives

and nudges

Are there campaigns or mechanisms in place to encourage

adoption (e.g. rewards, gamification, trials)?

Stakeholder

communication and

training

Are city staff, fleet operators, and service providers

equipped with the necessary knowledge and tools?

Equity and accessibility

considerations

Are vulnerable populations considered in design (e.g.

location of chargers, service affordability)?

Operational

Indicator

Description

Score

(1-4)

Notes

Charging and

infrastructure access

Can all intended users (residents, fleets, logistics, shared

vehicles) access the charging infrastructure reliably?

Fleet and asset

management readiness

Are digital or manual systems in place to manage EV fleets,

maintenance, and logistics?

Service integration and

interoperability

Are e-mobility services integrated with broader

transport/mobility systems (e.g. MaaS platforms, PT)?

After-sales and

maintenance support

Is there a functioning supply chain for repair, diagnostics,

and spare parts locally or regionally?

Monitoring and evaluation

mechanisms

Are data and feedback loops in place to monitor

performance, user satisfaction, and infrastructure utilisation

such as emissions reduction and energy consumption per

km?

Interpretation guide for each category:

■ 5-11 total per category: High risk – major gaps, targeted support or re-planning needed.

■ 12-15 total: Medium risk – partial readiness, some conditions in place but barriers remain.

■ 16-20 total: Low risk – high readiness, strong foundation for implementation and scaling.

Assessing the effect of electromobility projects is fundamental to deploying successful strategies.

The Early Barrier Assessment Tool (e-BAT) has been designed to identify barriers that may

jeopardise electric vehicle (EV) adoption and integration. It covers dimensions such as policy

frameworks, technological maturity, economic readiness, and social acceptance, among others. To

maximise its utility, however, e-BAT should not only be used for initial diagnostics but also as a tool

to evaluate the impact of demonstration projects by comparing the status of the city before and

after implementation.

The proposed methodology involves conducting two e-BAT assessments: one before project

implementation (baseline evaluation) and one after completion (post-project evaluation). Both

assessments use the same set of indicators, rated on a consistent scale. The results are then plotted

using a spider diagram, which visually displays the level of readiness across all evaluated

dimensions. This approach helps to quickly understand areas where the project has strengthened

the city's capabilities and where barriers remain.

To illustrate the methodology, a fictitious example is proposed below using sample data included

in the following tables. The spider diagram compares the baseline and post-project evaluations

Replicating e-mobility solutions

across five e-BAT categories. In this example, the project demonstrated improvements in all the

evaluated factors.

Technical

Baseline

evaluation

Post-project

evaluation

Indicator

Description

Score (1-4)

Grid readiness

Is the local grid capacity sufficient for scaling EV-related

infrastructure (charging, depots, V2G, etc.)?

Charging

infrastructure

availability

Are charging points (public or fleet) accessible and

adequately distributed to serve intended users?

Technology

compatibility

Are vehicles, chargers, and management systems

interoperable and compatible with common standards?

Data and

monitoring

systems

Are real-time monitoring tools or smart systems in place to

manage energy, vehicles, or operations?

Installation,

maintenance, and

technical support

Is there adequate technical expertise or service capacity to

install, maintain, and repair systems?

Economic

Baseline

evaluation

Post-project

evaluation

Indicator

Description

Score (1-4)

Initial investment

availability

Is municipal, national, or private funding available for upfront

infrastructure or vehicle costs?

Access to external

financing

Are accessible EU, national, or third-party funding

mechanisms available (e.g. loans, PPPs, green bonds)?

Total cost of

ownership

competitiveness

Are e-mobility solutions economically viable over their

lifecycle compared to traditional alternatives?

Business model

viability

Are clear, sustainable business models in place for

operations, maintenance, and long-term scaling?

Private sector

engagement

Is there demonstrated interest or participation from local

businesses or mobility/energy operators?

Regulatory

Baseline

evaluation

Post-project

evaluation

Indicator

Description

Score (1-4)

Permitting and

planning framework

Are planning, zoning, or permitting procedures clear and

supportive of EV-related infrastructure and services?

Standardization and

interoperability

requirements

Do regulations promote the use of common technical

standards (e.g. ISO 15118, OCPP) for seamless service

delivery?

Market access and

procurement rules

Do public procurement, concession, or licensing rules

enable fair access for EV-related technologies and

services?

Energy and grid

regulation alignment

Are regulatory frameworks in place to enable energy

services such as V2G, dynamic pricing, or load

management?

Incentives and policy

stability

Are there supportive policies (subsidies, tax breaks,

emission zones) with long-term consistency to encourage

investment?

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Social/Behavioral

Baseline

evaluation

Post-project

evaluation

Indicator

Description

Score (1-4)

Public awareness and

acceptance

Is the local population informed about and generally

supportive of e-mobility adoption?

User confidence and

familiarity

Are citizens and stakeholders comfortable with using EVs

or digital services (e.g. booking apps, V2G)?

Behavioural

incentives and nudges

Are campaigns or mechanisms in place to encourage

adoption (e.g. rewards, gamification, trials)?

Stakeholder

communication and

training

Are city staff, fleet operators, and service providers

equipped with the necessary knowledge and tools?

Equity and

accessibility

considerations

Are vulnerable populations considered in design (e.g.

location of chargers, service affordability)?

Operational

Baseline

evaluation

Post-project

evaluation

Indicator

Description

Score (1-4)

Charging and

infrastructure access

Can all intended users (residents, fleets, logistics, shared

vehicles) access the charging infrastructure reliably?

Fleet and asset

management

readiness

Are digital or manual systems in place to manage EV

fleets, maintenance, and logistics?

Service integration

and interoperability

Are e-mobility services integrated with broader

transport/mobility systems (e.g. MaaS platforms, PT)?

After-sales and

maintenance support

Is there a functioning supply chain for repair, diagnostics,

and spare parts locally or regionally?

Monitoring and

evaluation

mechanisms

Are data and feedback loops in place to monitor

performance, user satisfaction, and infrastructure

utilisation?

The following table highlights the scoring. The diagrams provide an intuitive visual summary of the

project’s effectiveness. By overlaying the two assessments (before and after), decision-makers and

stakeholders can clearly identify improvements and communicate results to funders, citizens, and

policymakers in an accessible format.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Baseline evaluation

Post-project evaluation

Technical

Economic

Regulatory

Social/Behavioral

Operational

Figure 10: Comparison of baseline and post-project implementation

This proposed methodology leverages the existing e-BAT tool to transform it into a practical

evaluation framework, enabling cities to systematically assess projects' impact on electromobility.

Its advantages include simplicity, clarity and adaptability to diverse frameworks.

4.3 Replication and success factors. Practical six

steps for cities to enable e-mobility

Scaling e-mobility solutions across European cities requires more than replicating technical pilots—

it calls for a structured, evidence-based process that addresses the full policy, operational, financial,

and social ecosystem in which these solutions must function. Building on insights from Lighthouse

and Fellow Cities, as well as supporting policy and market analysis presented in the first part of this

report, this section outlines a six-step methodology to guide urban practitioners through the journey

from diagnostics to full-scale deployment.

Each step—Diagnose, Plan, Engage, Select the intervention area, Invest, and Monitor—offers

practical entry points for cities to replicate proven e-mobility solutions in a manner that is both

locally adapted and strategically aligned with the EU priorities. Together, these steps serve as a

structured roadmap for cities to move from ambition to implementation, supported by evidence and

practices explored in the first part of this report.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

The steps below provide a flexible roadmap that combines generic process elements with

solution-specific recommendations for the five e-mobility solutions:

1. Public charging infrastructure

2. Electric bus systems

3. Last-mile delivery (urban logistics)

4. Vehicle-sharing systems

5. Vehicle-to-grid (V2G)

1. Diagnose

The first step in any replication process is to understand the city’s current conditions—both enabling

factors and constraints. This involves conducting a diagnostic assessment, which can take the form

of a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats), supported by the Early Barrier

Assessment Tool introduced earlier in this report.

Key considerations for the SWOT analysis could include:

Strengths: Existing infrastructure, available

technical expertise, supportive local policies, or

active pilot projects

Weaknesses: Gaps in charging infrastructure, low

public awareness, outdated regulations, or limited

grid capacity

Opportunities: National or EU funding availability,

policy shifts (e.g., Fit for 55), growing local demand

for clean transport

Threats: Political uncertainty, supply chain

instability, resistance from incumbent operators, or

social equity risks

In addition, cities should assess each of the five barrier dimensions—technical, economic, regulatory,

social/behavioural, and operational—using the Early Barrier Assessment Tool (e-BAT) to

produce a quantifiable profile of their readiness for implementation. This phase provides a critical

foundation for identifying suitable e-mobility solutions and prioritising interventions that align with

local capacity and ambition.

For the development of a strategy, the recommendation is that the SWOT analysis be complemented

by a TOWS analysis by finding the combination of Strengths and Opportunities [SO], Strenghts and

Threats [ST], Weaknesses and Opportunities [WO], and Weaknesses and Threats [WT], where the

WT is considered the red zone to be solved through a short-term plan.

Diagnose

•Conduct a diagnostic assesment of local conditions and barriers

Plan

•Design a strategy aligned with the regulatory framework and standards

Engage

•Involve stakeholders from across the ecosystem

Interventi

on Area

•Choose suitable sites for implementation

Invest

•Secure financing and define business models

Monitor

•Track results and evaluate the intervention

Replicating e-mobility solutions

2. Plan

Following a structured diagnostic phase, cities must design a realistic, locally grounded

implementation plan that is aligned with existing policies, responsive to urban needs, and compliant

with relevant technical and legal frameworks. This stage is critical for unlocking funding, securing

institutional support, and ensuring interoperability. While many enabling policies exist at the EU and

national levels—such as the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR), Clean Vehicles

Directive, and Fit for 55—local governments must interpret and operationalise these within their

specific urban contexts. Based on the findings in the first part of this report, this section outlines key

planning considerations for each e-mobility solution. EV charge facilities must follow the standards

below:

I. Vehicle-to-Charger communication standards

• ISO 15118 – Road vehicles – Vehicle-to-grid communication interface standard

• IEC 61851 – Electric vehicle conductive charging system

• SAE J1772 – SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler

II. Charging connector standards

• IEC 62196 – Plugs, socket-outlets, vehicle connectors, and inlets

• CHAdeMO – Japanese DC fast charging connector and communication protocol

• CCS (Combined Charging System) – Combines AC and DC charging in a single port (Europe uses

CCS2, USA uses CCS1 and NACS)

III. Charger to backend/network communication protocols

• OCPP (Open Charge Point Protocol) – Communication between chargers and central management

systems. Version 2.0.1 has now been validated as IEC 63584.

• OCPI (Open Charge Point Interface) – For roaming and interoperability between charging networks.

• OICP (Open InterCharge Protocol) – EV roaming between CPOs and service providers.

• OCHP (Open Clearing House Protocol) – Facilitates interaction between electric vehicle (EV)

charging station management systems and clearing house systems.

• VDV 261 – Defined by VDV (Verband Deutscher Verkehrsunternehmen). Includes specific value-

added services such as preconditioning in the vehicle.

• VDV 463 – Defined by VDV (Verband Deutscher Verkehrsunternehmen). Interface between depot

management systems and fleet management systems.

IV. Standards for bidirectional charging/V2G

• CHAdeMO – Japanese DC fast charging communication protocol and first V2G

• ISO 15118-20 – Extension of ISO 15118 for Bidirectional energy transfer (V2G)

• DIN SPEC 70121 – Interim standard for high-level communication (especially DC charging,

preceding ISO 15118)

Table 9: Summary of technical standards considered per solution

Technical

standard

Public

charging

system

Electrification of fleets

Bidirectional

electric

vehicle

charging

Electric bus

system

Last-mile

delivery

Vehicle-

sharing

system

ISO 15118

IEC 61851

SAE J1772

CHAdeMO

CCS

OCPP

OCPI

OICP

OCHP

VDV 261

VDV 463

ISO 15118-20

DIN SPEC

70121

The section below details the potential implementation of the above-mentioned regulations per e-

mobility solution:

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Public charging infrastructure

Regulatory and policy enablers

Standards to fulfil (per grey literature)

Align with the Alternative Fuels

Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR), which

mandates the deployment of public charging

stations across major corridors and urban

networks.

Integrate charging planning within local

Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs),

zoning strategies, and building regulations.

Implement policy tools such as preferential

access to public space, parking incentives

for EVs, and co-financing mechanisms to

encourage private sector participation.

OCPP (Open Charge Point Protocol): for interoperability

between charging hardware and backend systems.

OCPI (Open Charge Point Interface): to enable real-time

exchange of availability, pricing, and authentication data.

OICP (Open InterCharge Protocol): for enabling EV roaming

between networks.

ISO 15118 – Plug & Charge: for automatic user

authentication and billing without additional cards or apps.

Electric bus systems

Regulatory and policy enablers

Standards to fulfil (per grey literature)

Plan electric bus rollouts in accordance with

the Clean Vehicles Directive (2019/1161),

which sets binding procurement targets for

clean public vehicles across Member States.

Integrate e-bus fleet planning into broader

clean transport strategies, SUMPs, and air

quality plans.

Use Low Emission Zones (LEZs), public

procurement rules, and national climate

funding mechanisms as complementary

enablers.

Specific standards from VDV should be followed, e.g.:

VDV 261, communication between charger and server

allows, for example, preconditioning following ISO15118

VAS (Value-added services)

VDV 463, Interface between depot management systems

and fleet management systems

References to real-time fleet monitoring systems and depot

charging strategies suggest the importance of using data-

enabled and interoperable fleet control systems.

Compatibility with smart charging management platforms is

encouraged to optimize depot load management and vehicle

availability.

Last-mile delivery (urban logistics)

Regulatory and policy enablers

Standards to fulfil (per grey literature)

Design urban access regulations (e.g. low-

emission zones, loading time windows) to

favour zero-emission delivery vehicles.

Facilitate temporary or permanent use of

urban land for micro-hubs or urban

consolidation centres, particularly near

dense commercial zones.

Incentivise fleet operators through co-

financing of vehicles or access to public

chargers.

While no specific hardware or communications standards are

listed in the grey literature for last-mile vehicles, successful

implementation depends on integrating EVs with existing

charging infrastructure using protocols such as:

ISO 15118 and OCPP, where shared public chargers are

used.

Platforms may also rely on routing and tracking solutions,

although these are not standardised at the EU level and are

therefore not formally required by the cited policies.

Vehicle-sharing systems

Regulatory and policy enablers

Standards to fulfil (per grey literature)

Develop city-level licensing frameworks for

vehicle-sharing operators, covering fleet

size, geographic coverage, parking rights,

and data-sharing requirements.

Integrate EV-sharing schemes into digital

mobility platforms and SUMPs.

Use incentives such as reduced parking

tariffs, dedicated bays, or inclusion in public

MaaS systems to increase uptake.

Although the grey literature does not specify communication

protocols for shared EV platforms, several examples mention

that cities implemented:

Data-sharing arrangements between operators and

municipalities.

Integration of shared EV services into city apps and journey

planners (e.g. in Pamplona and Dresden), suggesting the

importance of platform compatibility and basic

interoperability without mandating specific protocols.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

If V2G is to be integrated in the sharing service, then

protocols such as ISO15118-20 or CHAdeMO should be

taken into account.

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G)

Regulatory and policy enablers

Standards to fulfil (per grey literature)

Engage early with national energy

regulators and local DSOs to clarify

conditions for bidirectional energy flows,

remuneration schemes, and participation in

local flexibility markets.

Plan V2G deployments in alignment with

building retrofit and renewable integration

programs.

Consider that business models such as fleet

operators, property managers, or vehicle-

sharing services can act as energy flexibility

providers.

ISO 15118-20: mentioned as the emerging international

standard that supports bidirectional communication between

EVs and charging infrastructure, including Plug & Charge

and V2G functionality.

CHADEMO: For old Japanese cars in place of ISO15118-20.

OCPP: mentioned as the protocol enabling centralised

management and data collection across different charger

types and providers.

3. Engage

Effective implementation depends on an early and large-scale engagement of relevant stakeholders.

This includes representatives from the public sector, private industry, utility providers, research

institutions, and civil society. The following building blocks are essential steps for achieving

commitment:

■ Set clear goals and share a joint vision, including benefits for the stakeholders and society

■ Identify the solution owner (typically a public authority or a concessionaire responsible for

long-term operation)

■ Appoint a solution manager (a dedicated operational lead or team to oversee

implementation)

■ Establish governance structures such as technical working groups, interdepartmental task

forces, or public-private steering committees

■ Design and facilitate co-creation processes, including citizen consultations, industry

roundtables, and workshops with local service providers

■ Develop a culture of continuous improvement and trust by listening, learning from the

experiences of others, and giving feedback

■ Be open for innovation when it comes to discussing and introducing new ideas and solutions

to overcome emerging challenges in project implementation (e.g. via defined tracks for

technology-, legal-, data-, or business-related challenges)

■ Emphasise the strengths of each partner and work on joint solutions (e.g. new operating

model with contributions from different partners)

■ Communicate and share progress and success of achievements in a continuous way

■ Ensure legal clarity regarding roles and responsibilities, particularly in areas where energy,

mobility, and data intersect (e.g. V2G, shared platforms)

In summary, engagement must be inclusive and continuous. Evidence from SCC projects shows that

successful replication depends both on technical readiness and on building trust. This creates a

shared vision and secures commitment from all actors involved in the ecosystem. Previous

collaborations and agreements, such as the development and adoption of a SUMPS or SULP, can act

as catalysts to carry out activities and provide an opportunity to involve partners.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

4. Identification of the intervention area

After developing a strategic plan and defining stakeholder roles, cities must carefully select the

intervention area where the e-mobility solution will be deployed. This decision shapes the solution’s

visibility, user acceptance, operational success, and potential for scaling. Cities should select areas

based on infrastructure readiness, user demand, regulatory flexibility, and opportunities for

replication. The selection process should consider the prioritisation of areas with sufficient grid

capacity and logistical feasibility. This helps to ensure user convenience and accessibility, the

integration with existing transport networks, and to assess the potential for scaling and replication

to other zones.

Solution-specific examples:

■ Public charging infrastructure: Focus on residential zones without off-street parking,

commercial centres, and transport nodes such as Park & Ride facilities. Example: prioritising

high-density urban areas where private charging is limited.

■ Electric bus systems: Choose locations with accessible depots, compatible bus routes, and

available grid capacity for overnight or opportunity charging. Example: aligning with existing

bus corridors to maximise impact.

■ Last-mile urban logistics: Target central districts with delivery restrictions or congestion

issues, and dense commercial areas with high delivery volumes. Example: using micro-hubs on

underutilised municipal land to support low-emission delivery zones.

■ Vehicle-sharing systems: Place shared electric vehicles in high-density residential areas,

locations underserved by public transport, and near multimodal hubs such as train stations.

Example: deploying car sharing points in districts with parking shortages to encourage shared

mobility.

■ Bidirectional charging – V2G: Select intervention areas where vehicle fleets remain

stationary for extended periods, such as residential districts with high EV ownership, company

parking lots, or depots for public or commercial fleets. Prioritise zones with strong grid

connectivity, dynamic energy pricing, and potential collaboration with energy providers or

DSOs. Example: deploying V2G infrastructure in business districts or logistics hubs to enable

vehicles to act as decentralised energy assets during peak demand periods.

5. Invest

Financing the implementation of e-mobility solutions requires a dual focus on upfront investment

and long-term financial sustainability. While many demonstration projects rely on public or EU

funding, true scalability depends on establishing robust business models, securing diversified

revenue streams, and clearly defining operational responsibilities. The distinction between the

solution owner—typically the public or concession-holding entity—and the solution manager, who

oversees the day-to-day execution and service delivery, is critical to risk management and

performance accountability.

Public charging infrastructure

Public charging infrastructure often involves capital-intensive deployment, followed by modest but

steady operational revenues. Cities must balance public service goals (accessibility, equity) with

private sector efficiency and cost-sharing.

Solution owner

Solution manager

Business model

Revenue streams and ROI

Usually, the city

or a public utility

may hold the

concession rights

for public space

usage.

Charging Point

Operator (CPO),

which may be a

private firm (e.g.

Fortum in

Stockholm) or a

municipal entity.

Concession-based public-

private partnership (PPP)

Direct municipal investment

with third-party operations

Blended finance using EU funds

(e.g. Horizon, CEF) + private

equity

User charging fees (per kWh

or session)

Advertising or ancillary

services (e.g. parking)

Grid flexibility services

(where applicable)

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Electric bus systems

Electric bus systems have higher initial costs compared to diesel fleets, primarily due to the expense

of the vehicles and charging infrastructure. However, these higher upfront costs are offset by lower

fuel and maintenance expenses, making the overall lifecycle economics more competitive. A key

decision in this transition will be whether to choose an opportunity charging or an overnight charging

solution, as this impacts the balance between battery costs and infrastructure requirements.

Solution owner

Solution manager

Business model

Revenue streams and ROI

Public Transport

Authority (PTA),

Public or Private

Transport

Operator (PTO),

or municipal

transit operator.

Fleet operator,

who may also be

responsible for

charging logistics.

Full ownership (public) with

state or EU co-financing

Leasing of e-buses from

manufacturers with

performance-based service

contracts

Depot sharing between public

and private fleets to optimise

infrastructure use

MaaS, includes the renting of

the bus, infrastructure, and all

the services (installation,

maintenance, energy...)

Long-term TCO analysis

must factor in energy price

stability and battery lifecycle

Subsidies (e.g. EU CEF or

national recovery funds)

often cover >50% of CAPEX

Energy savings and avoided

emissions monetised via

green procurement metrics

Last-mile delivery (urban logistics)

Electrified last-mile delivery solutions, particularly those using e-vans or e-cargo bikes, must achieve

cost-effectiveness through volume, route efficiency, and possibly multi-client models. Profitability

often hinges on the operational density of deliveries and low vehicle downtime.

Solution owner

Solution manager

Business model

Revenue streams and ROI

Can be public

(e.g. city-led

consolidation

centre) or private

logistics provider.

Typically, a third-

party courier or

operator with an

EV fleet.

City-facilitated logistics hub

with contracted service

providers

Co-financing of vehicle fleets in

exchange for service

obligations

Shared micro-hub platforms

involving multiple operators

Requires optimising route

density, delivery slots, and

smart routing

Cost recovery is often

slower—public co-funding

needed in early stages

Environmental externalities

(e.g. reduced emissions,

congestion) justify public

investment

Vehicle-sharing systems

Shared e-mobility solutions rely on high utilisation and predictable pricing to reach break-even. They

can be publicly subsidised (as a mobility service) or operated privately under city-set rules.

Solution owner

Solution manager

Business model

Revenue streams and ROI

Often, a private

company or

platform operator,

or public entities,

may own

infrastructure

(e.g. charging

spots).

Platform or fleet

operator

responsible for

maintenance,

rebalancing, and

customer service.

Subscription- or usage-based

pricing (per minute/km)

Public support via

infrastructure, parking rights,

or start-up subsidies

Bundled in MaaS platforms to

increase demand

Include V2G services

(frequency regulation, peak

saving...) to reduce investment

in the vehicles

Critical mass of users and

dense fleet distribution

required

Integration with public

transport enhances

stickiness and revenue

Battery longevity, repair

costs, and insurance shape

operating margins

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G)

V2G projects involve complex financing due to their dual role in mobility and energy systems.

Financial viability depends on capturing value from energy services, load balancing, and grid support,

not solely transportation. Complex projects due to state-of-the-art.

Solution owner

Solution manager

Business model

Revenue streams and ROI

Could be a city,

energy

cooperative, fleet

owner, or building

manager.

Aggregator or

energy service

company (ESCO)

integrating EVs

into local flexibility

markets.

Revenue from grid services

(e.g. demand response,

frequency regulation)

Integration with solar PV or

local energy systems to

maximise self-consumption

Possibly combined with shared

mobility services to generate

mobility revenue

Depends heavily on local

energy tariffs, market rules,

and vehicle availability

Upfront costs for

bidirectional chargers remain

high

Payback period is extended,

but improves with growing

flexible markets

6. Monitor

Monitoring and evaluation are critical to ensure that the solution delivers intended outcomes,

supports institutional learning, and informs future replication:

• Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) tailored to the solution and local goals, including

usage rates, energy savings, emissions reductions, and customer satisfaction

• Data systems to track performance in real time (e.g. digital dashboards, integrated mobility

management platforms)

• Evaluation timelines, such as quarterly reviews during the first year and annual

assessments thereafter

• Feedback loops to enable adjustments to tariffs, service levels, user communication, or

maintenance routines

• Knowledge-sharing mechanisms to contribute results to EU-wide learning platforms (e.g.

Smart Cities Marketplace, NetZeroCities Knowledge Hub)

The practical steps outlined in this section are designed to support cities in turning technical

opportunity into systemic transformation. While each solution—whether focused on public charging,

fleet electrification, last-mile delivery, vehicle-sharing, or V2G—presents its own operational and

financial considerations, the underlying process remains consistent: assess local readiness, align

with policy and standards, engage stakeholders early, identify the right implementation zone,

structure investment with long-term viability in mind, and track outcomes rigorously.

4.3.1 E-mobility solutions replication template

This template has been developed in alignment with the standardised replication methodologies

outlined in CEN-CENELEC CWA 17381:2019

and DIN SPEC 91387:2020-08

. Those

methodologies provide a common structure for documenting and sharing innovative urban mobility

and smart city solutions. By following this format, cities and practitioners can ensure that key

information—such as context, objectives, financial details, implementation steps, impacts, and

lessons learned—is presented consistently and comprehensively.

The purpose of this structure is to support transparent knowledge exchange, replication of

good practices, and cross-city learning. It enables stakeholders—including municipalities,

The CEN Workshop agreement corresponds to the Description and Assessment of Good Practices for Smart

City Solutions, developed and approved by BABLE Smart Cities, among other members

https://www.cencenelec.eu/media/CEN-CENELEC/CWAs/RI/cwa17381_2019.pdf

DIN SPEC 91387:2020-08 of Communities and digital transformation - Overview of the spheres of activity

https://www.dinmedia.de/en/technical-rule/din-spec-91387/326373721

Replicating e-mobility solutions

service providers, funding agencies, and researchers—to more easily understand the replicability

potential of a solution and evaluate its applicability in new contexts. The fields included here reflect

both technical and non-technical dimensions such as stakeholder roles, citizen engagement,

regulatory enablers, and sustainability alignment (e.g. SDGs).

While Chapter 4.3.1 contains the blank template to be filled, Chapter 4.3.2 contains an annotated

model that can be used for guidance and inspiration.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

E-mobility solutions replication template CEN-CENELEC CWA 17381:2019.

General information

Use case

name

Provide a short, descriptive title

that clearly indicates what the

use case is about.

Location

Specify the geographic location

where the use case is or was

implemented.

Scale

Select the spatial scale of

implementation: a site,

neighbourhood, district, city, or

beyond.

☐

Individual

☐

Neighbourhood

☐

District

☐

City

☐

Beyond the city

Sectors

Select one or more sectors that the

use case addresses (e.g. mobility,

energy, ICT, environment, public

services).

☐

Mobility

☐

Energy

☐

ICT

☐

Waste management

☐

Water management

☐

Urban planning

☐

Health

☐

Environment

☐

Governance

☐

Education

☐

Security

☐

Housing

☐

Culture

☐

Economy

☐

Public services

Planning time

Enter the year and duration

when the solution was planned.

Implementation

time

Enter the year and duration when

the solution was first implemented

on-site.

SDGs

addressed

Select the UN SDGs this use case contributes to

☐

SDG 1: No Poverty

☐

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

☐

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

☐

SDG 4: Quality Education

☐

SDG 5: Gender Equality

☐

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

☐

SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

☐

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

☐

SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

☐

SDG 10: Reduced Inequality

☐

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

☐

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

☐

SDG 13: Climate Action

☐

SDG 14: Life Below Water

☐

SDG 15: Life on Land

☐

SDG 16: Peace and Justice Strong Institutions

☐

SDG 17: Partnerships to achieve the Goal

Main benefits

List the primary, measurable

advantages of the use case

(e.g., reduced CO₂ emissions,

increased public transport use,

time savings, improved air

quality).

Additional

benefits

Include secondary or qualitative

benefits such as enhanced user

satisfaction, increased civic

engagement, improved city image,

or capacity-building among staff.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Stakeholders

Implementers

Identify the entities responsible

for implementing or coordinating

the use case (e.g. municipal

departments, consortia, private

contractors).

Service

providers

List the organisation(s) that

operate or maintain the

implemented solution.

End users

Who uses or benefits from the solution? Examples: citizens, city staff, businesses,

vulnerable groups.

Description

Summary

Provide a clear and concise overview of the use case. What does it aim to solve and how?

Challenge/goal

Describe the core urban challenge or problem addressed by the use case. What issues did

it aim to solve, and what were the overarching goals?

Solution

summary

Summarise the implemented solution(s): What actions were taken? What technology,

policy, or service changes were introduced to address the challenge?

Citizen

participation

Explain how citizens were involved in the design, planning, or implementation. Examples:

co-creation workshops, surveys, participatory budgeting, mobile feedback apps.

Financial details

Initial

investment

Estimated range of initial

investment made in the project

(e.g., infrastructure, technology,

services). This gives readers an idea

of financial scale.

Included in

investment

List the key components covered (e.g.,

vehicles, infrastructure, software

licences, sensors, citizen engagement

activities). Mention scale or quantity if

known.

Funding

sources

Select relevant funding categories. You

may check more than one.

☐

Municipal

☐

Non-municipal public

☐

Private

☐

Bank/Financial

☐

Other:

Funding

details

Describe specific mechanisms,

programs, or tools used—such as

national recovery funds, Horizon

Europe, structural funds, or private co-

investment frameworks.

Revenue

streams

Explain how the solution generates

or will generate revenue (e.g., user

fees, service contracts, licensing,

data monetisation, public service

agreements). Include business

model highlights.

Expected

ROI period

Estimate the time required to recover

the initial investment (e.g., 3–5 years,

10+ years, or not applicable).

Insights gained during implementation

Impact

Describe the measurable or perceived outcomes of the project. Did it reduce emissions,

improve accessibility, promote modal shift, or influence public behaviour?

Supporting

factors

List the enablers that contributed to success—such as local policy support, strong governance,

funding mechanisms, citizen demand, or existing infrastructure.

Lessons

learned

Summarise challenges encountered during implementation and how they were overcome.

Highlight key takeaways for other cities looking to replicate the use case.

Results

Highlight the outcomes achieved so

far, including usage data, satisfaction

levels, or environmental/economic

results.

Next steps

Outline any planned or recommended

follow-up actions. Will the solution be

scaled, replicated, integrated with

other services, or monitored long-

term?

Replicating e-mobility solutions

4.3.2 Annotated model e-mobility solutions replication template

Public charging system

Electric bus system

Last-mile logistics

Vehicle-sharing system

Bidirectional electric vehicle charging

General information

Use case name

Short, descriptive title that clearly indicates what the use case is about.

Location

Geographic location where the use case is or was implemented.

Scale

Select the spatial scale

of implementation

☐ Individual ☐ Neighbourhood ☐ District ☐ City ☐ Beyond city

Sectors

Select one or more

sectors that the use

case addresses

☐ Mobility ☐ Energy ☐ ICT ☐ Waste management ☐ Water management ☐ Urban planning ☐

Health ☐ Environment ☐ Governance ☐ Education ☐ Security ☐ Housing ☐ Culture ☐ Economy ☐

Public services

Planning time

Year and duration when the solution is planned.

Implementation

time

Year and duration when the solution will be first implemented on-site.

SDGs addressed

Select the UN SDGs this

use case contributes to

☐ SDG 1: No Poverty ☐ SDG 2: Zero Hunger ☐ SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being ☐ SDG 4: Quality Education ☐ SDG 5: Gender Equality ☐ SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation ☐ SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy ☐ SDG 8:

Decent Work and Economic Growth ☐ SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure ☐ SDG 10: Reduced Inequality ☐ SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities ☐ SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production ☐ SDG

13: Climate Action ☐ SDG 14: Life Below Water ☐ SDG 15: Life on Land ☐ SDG 16: Peace and Justice Strong Institutions ☐ SDG 17: Partnerships to achieve the Goal

Main benefits

List the primary,

measurable advantages

of the use case

(e.g., reduced CO₂ emissions, increased public transport use, time savings, improved air quality).

Additional benefits

Include secondary or

qualitative benefits

(e.g., enhanced user satisfaction, increased civic engagement, improved city image, or capacity-

building among staff).

Stakeholders

Implementers

Identify the

entities

responsible for

implementing or

coordinating the

use case (e.g.

municipal

departments,

consortia,

private

contractors).

It is essential that the respective city coordinates the development of new

public infrastructure via the municipal departments and defines the

necessary structures, processes, and regulations. Once the necessary processes

and regulations have been defined among the entities, this can change in such a

way that, for example, private companies act more freely in accordance with

the agreed-upon rules and regulations. A good example of this is Stockholm,

where the city concludes so-called access rights agreements with companies that

build and operate infrastructure.

Implementation of an electric bus system must be coordinated by the public

transport authority at the regional or metropolitan level, working in close

collaboration with the municipal mobility and infrastructure departments. This

authority should lead procurement, route planning, and integration with energy

systems. Strategic direction and financing frameworks should be set through

cooperation between city governments and national ministries or funding bodies.

Once operational standards and contracting models are established, bus

operators—selected via tender—can manage daily service delivery, while

infrastructure providers (charging, depots) operate under long-term public-private

partnership agreements aligned with city-wide sustainability goals.

It is suggested that cities involve a combination of municipal departments,

public housing authorities, and private logistics operators to coordinate

last-mile delivery solutions. As the contact person in the city of Vienna

suggested, partnerships with public housing providers were key to accelerating

the deployment of parcel lockers and securing locations for micro-hubs. Cities

may also rely on national postal services or private contractors for fleet

operations, as shown by the Austrian Post pilot. Establishing neutral micro-hub

operators can further ensure cross-provider cooperation.

Due to additional aspects that come with e-car sharing, it is important that the

team be composed not only of car sharing companies but also DSO’s,

residential users, and innovation partners, such as in Utrecht, where the

charging station manufacturers were key in the project

Service

providers

List the

organisation(s)

that operate or

maintain the

implemented

solution.

The following organisations contribute to the functionality; in some cases, the responsibilities may coincide:

- Grid operator (secures the overall functionality of the grid)

- Energy provider (ensures energy supply)

- Local network-management company (e.g. grid expansion for AC/DC Charging)

- Charging infrastructure operator (responsible for build-up and operation as well as maintenance). This can include

both municipal utilities and private companies. Depending on whether it is a public or semi-public charging

infrastructure, energy companies, retail chains, and joint ventures with car manufacturers may be involved, for

example.

- E-Mobility (service) provider (ensures access to the charging infrastructure of different providers, e.g. via RFID

card or App)

Service providers for electric bus systems typically include:

- Public transport operators, responsible for operating the bus services under performance-based contracts.

- Charging infrastructure operators, who manage, maintain and, in some cases, own the depot and on-route

charging facilities.

- Energy utilities, which provide electricity supply and may also offer grid services, peak-load management, or

infrastructure upgrades.

- Vehicle maintenance providers, either in-house or contracted, who ensure the electric fleet remains operational.

Cities often bundle these roles in concession agreements to streamline accountability and incentivise service

quality.

The suggestion is that the following organisations operate or maintain the solution:

- National postal services – e.g. Austrian Post, responsible for fleet operations and routing.

- Private logistics operators – contracted couriers or consortia managing daily delivery services.

- Municipal housing authorities – providing and maintaining parcel locker locations, as the contact person in the city

of Vienna suggested.

- Neutral micro-hub Operators – facilitating shared use of consolidation centres.

- City-owned entities – in some cases, municipalities manage smart lockers directly (e.g. Vienna’s NextBox

network).

- Energy providers – responsible for maintaining depot charging infrastructure.

These organisations will be key for operation and maintenance:

- Car sharing companies. Depending on the agreements or concessions, these companies will be more or less

important. For example, cities such as Utrecht have a few of them and the city only allows them to operate with

permits.

- DSOs. If the aim is to provide services to the grid.

- Charging station manufacturers. In some cases, manufacturers are key for innovative solutions.

- CPOs. Cities normally organise where to install chargers and CPOs will operate them.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Currently, given the limited legislative framework for this type of charging

installation, the implementation of bidirectional charging (V2X) projects requires

the active involvement of public administrations as drivers and facilitators, who

define regulatory frameworks and urban strategies. Other key participants are the

Distribution System Operators (DSOs), especially when there is the possibility of

feeding energy back into the grid. They help ensure safe and effective integration.

Additionally, collaboration with technology providers and the development of

interoperable standards are essential to enable scalable, efficient, and user-

friendly V2X solutions.

The following organisations can be involved in EV bidirectional charging projects:

- Distribution System Operators (DSOs) and Energy providers/utilities – ensure grid stability, enable grid feed-in

operations, and facilitate integration into flexibility markets (if existent).

- Charging infrastructure operators (CPOs) – install, operate, and maintain bidirectional chargers, ensuring

compliance with standards and safety.

- Charging station manufacturers – provide V2X-capable chargers and ensure compatibility with vehicles and

management systems. Basic in early-stage projects.

- Car sharing companies or fleet operators – manage vehicle availability while participating in grid services. Depends

on the ownership of the vehicle.

- Maintenance service providers – conduct maintenance to guarantee reliable charger and system operation.

- System integrators – coordinate integration with local renewables, storage, and building energy management

systems.

End users

Who uses or

benefits from

the solution?

Examples:

citizens, city

staff,

businesses,

vulnerable

groups.

Both private individuals and commercial players can be considered as end users.

Citizens are the main beneficiaries of the e-buses.

Citizens, particularly residents in social housing, benefit from improved delivery convenience and reduced street congestion. Businesses, especially logistics companies and local retailers, gain from optimised delivery routes

and shared micro-hub infrastructure. Vulnerable groups also benefit from better access to parcel services through conveniently located lockers, particularly in underserved areas.

Final users are direct beneficiaries of the solution, but other collectives will indirectly receive benefits, such as in Utrecht, where V2G chargers help homeowners to have enough power to supply the buildings.

Potential users or beneficiaries include:

- Private EV owners – use vehicles as building storage to save on electricity bills or provide flexibility services to grid operators.

- Commercial fleets (EV sharing companies) – reduce operational costs and earn revenue by providing grid services.

- Municipalities – deploy V2X-capable public fleets to support grid stability and lower energy costs.

- DSOs and energy providers – benefit from grid balancing and enhanced flexibility.

Description

Summary

Clear and concise overview of the use case. What does it aim to solve and how?

Challenge/Goal

Describe the core urban

challenge or problem

addressed by the use

case. What issues did it

aim to solve and what

were the overarching

goals?

The overarching goal of this solution is to ensure the charging of electric vehicles in public spaces as a prerequisite for the spread of electric vehicles and reduced traffic emissions. A major challenge here is to bring

together the partners required to set up the infrastructure and to define a set of rules for its construction and operation. Another potential challenge is that, depending on the situation of the grid in the respective city,

complex earthworks and extensions to the grid must be carried out, which entails high costs.

The core urban challenge addressed by the electric bus system is reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution (including noise) from public transport, while maintaining reliable and efficient mobility services.

The transition to electric buses responds to national and EU-level mandates for zero-emission fleets and aims to meet the “zero growth” traffic goal in urban regions. These specify that all future mobility demand must

be absorbed by public transport, walking, or cycling. The solution also seeks to address rising operational costs linked to fossil fuels and energy prices, while improving public health, noise levels, and the attractiveness

of public transport.

The core urban challenge addressed by this use case is the increasing traffic congestion and environmental pollution driven by the growth of e-commerce and on-demand deliveries. The solution aimed to reduce last-

mile delivery emissions, minimise delivery distances, and lower failed delivery rates through micro-hubs, parcel lockers, and fleet electrification. Stephan Hartmann – City of Vienna: “The overarching goal was to

support cleaner, more efficient urban logistics while improving delivery convenience, especially in dense residential areas.”

The main challenge in all projects is reducing traffic within large cities. Car sharing means giving up car ownership. Furthermore, e-car sharing aims to reduce pollution. Projects such as those in Utrecht, with station-

based V2G e-hubs, also serve the network and residential users. For example, Amsterdam proposed an e-hub solution in isolated and under-resourced areas, improving mobility for nearby homeowners.

The main challenge addressed by bidirectional electric vehicle charging is to maximise the value of electric vehicles within the energy system. While EVs traditionally act as electricity consumers, V2X technology also

allows them to function as distributed energy storage systems, supporting grid stability and the integration of renewable energy, for example. The overarching goals include improving the economic viability of owning

an EV by enabling new sources of income (such as grid support services and peak shaving), increasing the use of locally produced renewable energy, and providing backup power during supply outages.

Solution summary

Summarise the

implemented

solution(s): What

actions were taken?

What technology, policy,

or service changes were

introduced to address

the challenge?

In order to minimize the cost of setting up the infrastructure, work should be planned in advance and combined (e.g. laying empty conduits to avoid later work). Regarding infrastructure procurement, it should be

checked (e.g. if public organisations are involved) whether a procurement can be bundled. In order to create an attractive use case for private actors, the city should call for a clear distribution of responsibilities (e.g.

via access right agreements) and distribute the resulting financial flows fairly. Stockholm can be mentioned here as an example. The city receives the revenue from the parking fees, whereas the charging

infrastructure operator is allowed to keep the revenue generated by the charging process. Conversely, the provider is obliged to keep the infrastructure operational. In addition, the charging infrastructure should be

easy to find, and, at best, information should be shared to provide information about infrastructure under construction or already reserved for construction (see mapping approach in Stockholm) to make the

construction of further infrastructure as easy as possible.

The implemented solution involved the phased transition from diesel to electric buses within the public transport system. Key actions included adapting public procurement processes to prioritise zero-emission vehicles

based on prior political decisions), upgrading depot and on-route infrastructure for electric charging, and adjusting service contracts to reflect new operational requirements. The transition required close coordination

Replicating e-mobility solutions

between public authorities, grid operators, and mobility planners to ensure technical feasibility and cost control. International bus manufacturers—particularly from Asia—played a crucial role in supplying vehicles and

related technologies. The shift was supported by national funding frameworks and long-term service agreements that incentivised reliability, sustainability, and performance.

Cities should introduce a combination of electrified delivery fleets, micro-hubs, and publicly accessible parcel lockers to address last-mile delivery challenges. As an example, Vienna’s partnering with public housing

authorities was key to securing locker locations. The recommended is to support pilot projects with logistics operators, gradually scale charging infrastructure, and transition to city-owned or neutral locker networks.

Cities should prioritise data-driven routing and real-time monitoring while enabling flexible, shared micro-hub access to maximise delivery efficiency.

Most important is that the cities understand that e-car sharing will be used to reduce traffic and pollution. With good planning, this can also provide services to the owners. One good solution is to allow or promote car

sharing companies but manage the place to park and charge e-cars. This solution in Utrecht gives the opportunity to go to the grid market and provide services using the chargers installed. If the solution is station- or

e-hub-based like in Amsterdam (and not in a floating solution), the cars are localised rather than available around the city. This is perhaps less optimal for the customer but practical for the city.

The implemented solution involved deploying bidirectional charging infrastructure integrated with energy management systems, enabling electric vehicles to act both as consumers and providers of energy. In

Trondheim, for example, the project leveraged a car sharing model using V2G-compatible vehicles and chargers, facilitating both shared mobility services and grid support functionalities. Key actions included installing

bidirectional chargers in strategic locations such as buildings and public parking facilities, enrolling these assets into local flexibility markets, and establishing collaboration frameworks with DSOs to ensure safe grid

integration.

Citizen participation

Explain how citizens

were involved in the

design, planning, or

implementation.

Examples: co-creation

workshops, surveys,

participatory budgeting,

mobile feedback apps

Make use of information campaigns and innovative event formats that address the benefits for users and user groups (e.g. target multifamily housing estates). Offer checklist information brochures, webinars,

and seminars, including stakeholders from the system (e.g. invite infrastructure operators). Generate opportunities to test electromobility, including the charging process.

Citizen participation was integrated primarily through public consultations, mobility surveys, real-time information provision, and digital feedback tools. Local authorities engaged residents to gather input on

preferences, service quality, and accessibility needs during the planning phase. In some cases, co-creation workshops were held to discuss broader mobility goals and gather feedback on proposed changes to

public transport. Mobile apps and digital platforms enabled real-time information provision and user feedback once electric bus services were operational. This helped authorities to adjust or improve

communication. Transparent communication about environmental benefits and service improvements also played a role in building public support for the transition.

1) Engage public housing authorities to identify suitable and accepted locations for parcel lockers (Vienna). 2) Involve representatives of local commerce to co-design micro-hub locations that align with daily

delivery patterns and business needs. 3) Conduct local surveys or feedback sessions to understand citizen preferences for locker placement and delivery accessibility. 4) Facilitate open communication channels

during planning to address community concerns and improve acceptance. 5) Use simple, accessible consultation formats to ensure participation from a wide range of residents, including vulnerable groups.

Like other solutions, citizen participation is a key. From the onset, promote the solution with workshops providing an opportunity for citizens to agree or disagree about the place to install chargers and/or e-

hubs. Communication is key and, in the case of v2g chargers, it is important to explain the benefits to have the e-hub close to the buildings to provide power to them.

In EV bidirectional charging projects, it is essential to actively involve EV owners – whether private individuals, public entities, or businesses – because they become key actors in the energy system. Awareness

campaigns and social communication should be implemented from the beginning, as in any electric mobility project, to inform users about the benefits of V2X technology. These include potential economic

incentives that range from providing grid services, the possibility of using their vehicles as backup storage for their homes or businesses, to the role of EVs in supporting local renewable energy use by storing

energy for times of high demand or grid prices. It is useful to organise webinars, workshops and co-creation sessions to explain these advantages, resolve concerns, and identify preferred charger locations.

Financial details

Initial investment

Estimated range of

initial investment made

in the project (e.g.,

infrastructure,

technology, services).

This gives readers an

idea of financial scale.

The initial investment depends on factors such as the status of the grid

(e.g. reinforcement of the power connection), the possibility of

bundling tasks (e.g. excavation work), the planned technology (AC vs.

DC), and any necessary additional components as well as required

electrical installation. In addition, there are ongoing operating costs

such as those for annual maintenance, the fees for the backend, and

the electricity purchase. Hardware costs for AC charging stations are

about ~ 1500€ (11 kW AC), ~ 2500€ (22 kW AC), and 3300-4000€

(double charging station (2x 22 kW AC)). A standard DC station (50

kW) costs between 20,000-40,000€. The costs for installation and

infrastructure (per station) can be many times higher than the actual

costs for the hardware, depending on the extent of groundwork or

electrical installation work required.

Initial investment for deploying an electric bus system typically ranges

from 35-100 M€, depending on fleet size and infrastructure needs.

This range generally corresponds to projects involving 50 to 200

electric buses. Costs include vehicle procurement (at approximately

400,000€–700,000€ per bus), charging infrastructure (depot and/or

on-route), grid upgrades, depot retrofits, and digital fleet management

systems. Additional expenses may cover staff training, maintenance

equipment, and planning services. National or EU-level co-financing

mechanisms often help reduce the financial burden on cities,

particularly when aligned with clean transport or climate-neutrality

objectives.

The initial investment range for last-mile delivery solutions typically

varies depending on scale and components. Based on comparable

projects, small pilots with 2-5 electric vans and basic depot charging

Included in

investment

List the key

components

covered (e.g.,

vehicles,

infrastructure,

software

licences,

sensors,

citizen

engagement

activities).

Mention scale

or quantity if

known.

Initial components/costs:

- Charging station (dependant on AC or DC charging technology)

- Back-end incl. API gateways for third-party providers

- Access technology (App, RFID, etc.)

- Installation work

- Infrastructure work

Ongoing costs:

- Maintenance

- Back-end fee

- Energy purchase

The electric bus system solution typically includes the following key components:

- Vehicles: Procurement of 50–200 electric buses (standard and articulated), compliant with zero-emission regulations.

- Charging infrastructure: Installation of depot and/or on-route chargers (AC or DC), including medium-voltage grid

connections and transformer upgrades.

- Depot modifications: Retrofitting of bus depots with charging bays, ventilation systems, fire safety measures, and

energy management tools.

- Energy supply systems: Contracts or infrastructure to secure stable, preferably renewable, electricity supply.

- Fleet management software: Tools for route planning, battery monitoring, charging schedules, and predictive

maintenance.

- Driver and staff training: Programs for safe and efficient operation of electric buses and chargers.

- Citizen engagement: Communication campaigns, passenger feedback tools (e.g., apps, surveys), and real-time

service information systems.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

may require investments starting from 100,000€ to 250,000€, e.g.

Smarter Together project (Vienna) pilot, where early-stage testing

involved limited retrofitted electric vans and depot-based charging.

Mid-sized deployments, including parcel lockers and micro-hubs, can

range from 500,000€ to 1.5 M€. The UlaaDS project, for instance,

provides examples of micro-hub and parcel locker deployment with co-

funded infrastructure typically falling in this range.

The initial investment for e-car sharing resembles that for the public

charging system. The idea is to allow sharing companies to participate

and give them permission to do so. The position of the city council

would be to promote places to have the e-hubs and charging stations.

This is valid for a mature market because V2G solutions require

investing in bidirectional charging stations with a higher cost than

standard ones and involve a technological risk. In this case, AC V2G

chargers cost 4-6k€, DC V2G chargers 6-9k€.

The most important consideration is to find a CPO that will provide the

service and, in the future, also provide maintenance services.

The initial investment for bidirectional EV charging projects varies

depending on scale, technology, and integration requirements. Core

cost components include the bidirectional chargers themselves – with

AC V2G chargers typically priced between 4000–6000€ and DC V2G

chargers ranging from 6000–9000€ per unit. Besides EV chargers,

investments are required for compatible electric vehicles with V2G

functionality (for example around 35,000€ for a V2G Nissan Leaf).

Further expenses involve deploying monitoring and control systems to

manage bidirectional charging safely and efficiently, especially when

providing grid services in coordination with the DSO or participating in

flexibility markets. If the project is designed to integrate with local

energy systems for prosumer use (e.g. buildings using EV batteries as

stationary storage), then dedicated energy management platforms and

building integration interfaces may also be necessary.

- Electric vehicles: Initial pilots involved 2–5 retrofitted e-vans, later scaled to larger fleets, as the contact person in the

city of Vienna suggested.

- Charging infrastructure: Depot-based chargers for small fleets, with future expansion towards shared high-power

charging hubs.

- Parcel lockers: City-owned, white-label locker networks such as Vienna’s NextBox, which integrated over 720 locker

stations across the city.

- Micro-hubs: Local consolidation points aimed at reducing delivery distances and increasing efficiency, typically located

in public housing or shared urban spaces.

- Routing and monitoring software: Route optimisation systems used by logistics operators, with data shared in

aggregate form with the city.

- Citizen engagement activities: Coordination with public housing authorities and informal citizen consultation ensured

solution acceptance, particularly in social housing areas.

Direct expenses will be:

- Charging station (CPO)

- e-cars (e-car sharing company)

- Back-end incl. API gateways for third-party providers (CPO)

- Installation and infrastructure work (CPO)

Ongoing costs:

- Maintenance (CPO)

- Back-end fee (CPO)

- Energy purchase

Direct expenses will be:

- Bidirectional charging stations

- Electric Vehicles

- Energy Management Systems (EMS)

- Monitoring and control software (includes back-end platforms for charger management, user access, and

communication with grid operators or flexibility markets)

Ongoing costs:

- Maintenance (CPO)

- Back-end fee (CPO)

- Energy purchase

Funding sources

Select relevant funding

categories. You may

check more than one.

☐

Municipal

☐

Non-municipal public

☐

Private

☐

Bank/Financial

☐

Other:

Depending on the country and region, subsidies for developing charging infrastructure

can be provided at the national regional or municipal level. In many places, financing is

organised by banks and other organisations on behalf of the funding body; they support

infrastructure development and provide funds for this purpose. Many countries have a

funding database that provides important information. In addition, the recommendation

is to contact local authorities such as the district office, the public utility company, or the

business development organisation.

The funding model is typically mixed, combining municipal and national public

contributions (often under climate or mobility agreements), with private investment from

contracted operators or infrastructure providers. Financial institutions may support large-

scale projects through concessional loans or sustainability-linked financing instruments.

Examples: national government, EU programs, operators, technology providers under

concession, green bonds, EIB loans)

The most common funding sources for last-mile delivery solutions are: private funding

(typically provided by logistics operators and national postal services, which often lead

the investment in electric fleets and routing technologies, e.g. Vienna) and municipal

funding (supporting public infrastructure such as parcel lockers and micro-hubs,

especially when deployed on public land)

For the e-car sharing the most common funding sources are:

- Private funds. Owners of sharing companies will invest in the project

- Municipal funding. Permits or promoting installation of charging stations

- DSO funding. In the case of V2G they will pay for battery availability

- Reduction of the power invoice. In the case of V2G.

The funding source for bidirectional electric vehicle (EV) charging projects can vary,

adapting to each country’s regulatory maturity regarding V2X. In countries with

advanced legislation and established market frameworks, private investment can play a

leading role, with funds coming directly from companies, fleet operators, car sharing

Funding

details

Describe

specific

mechanisms,

programs, or

tools used—

such as

national

recovery

funds, Horizon

Europe,

structural

funds, or

private co-

investment

frameworks.

In addition to different funding options (on different levels), governments can provide subsidies, tax incentives,

or low-interest loans to encourage private companies to invest in any of the 5 specific solutions, while also

setting mandates that ensure public access to charging networks. The recommendation is therefore to check

current legislation and regulations.

Typical funding opportunities might come from one of the following entities:

- National climate or mobility packages: Such as Norway’s Byvekstavtalen (City Growth Agreement), which

co-finances sustainable transport infrastructure with state contributions covering up to 70% of eligible

costs.

- EU structural and cohesion funds: Accessed for infrastructure upgrades, especially in cohesion regions.

- Horizon Europe/Horizon 2020: Used to pilot innovative charging solutions, fleet management tools, or

vehicle-to-grid integration.

- European Investment Bank (EIB) loans: Long-term financing for fleet procurement and depot retrofits.

- Private co-investment frameworks: Often via public-private partnerships (PPPs), where private operators

or manufacturers invest in return for service contracts or access rights.

Examples of available funds to finance part of the solutions mentioned in the present guidelines:

▪ HORIZON-CL5-2026-02-D4-04 (IA) Innovative approaches for the deployment of Positive Energy Districts

o Opens: 16.09.25 | Closes: 17.02.26

o Expected outcomes and scope:

o Proven PED solutions with net positive energy balance & replicability; increased citizen engagement

& social acceptance; improved tools & training for professionals; supportive local planning

frameworks; enhanced cooperation between municipalities, energy sectors & communities to

accelerate climate-neutral PED adoption.

▪ HORIZON-CL5-2026-02-D3-20 (IA) Innovative tools and services to manage and empower energy

communities

o Opens: 16.09.25 | Closes: 17.02.26

o Expected outcomes and scope:

o Open-source tools for energy community asset management, local trading & grid services; improved

prosumer participation & secure cross-sector data exchange; increased renewable integration;

strengthened local policies & digital planning tools; validated in 5+ energy communities, fostering

social acceptance & community-led innovation.

Replicating e-mobility solutions

providers, and even individual EV owners, either using their own resources or external

financing (e.g. green loans). In these cases, utilities or Distribution System Operators

(DSOs) may also provide payments for flexibility services or battery availability.

In countries with less developed regulatory frameworks, public administrations usually

lead the deployment, with municipal or national funding driving demonstration projects.

Energy companies, technology providers, and car manufacturers may participate as co-

investors or technology partners.

▪ HORIZON-CL5-2026-02-D3-19 (IA) Innovation solutions for a generative AI-powered digital spine of the

EU energy system

o Opens: 16.09.25 | Closes: 17.02.26

o Expected outcomes and scope:

o Generative AI tools enabling smart grid optimisation, demand flexibility & renewable integration;

decentralised, secure AI-powered services for DSOs, prosumers & energy communities; enhanced

grid resilience & efficiency; AI-supported planning & forecasting; interoperable tools for system

operators & energy service providers across sectors.

Revenue streams

Explain how the solution

generates or will

generate revenue (e.g.,

user fees, service

contracts, licensing,

data monetisation,

public service

agreements). Include

business model

highlights.

Revenue is generated by selling electricity during the charging process. In addition,

depending on the location, revenue can be generated through car park charges. In many

places, this may be included in the charging fee. In addition, fees are due to the operator

of the back-end system. Connecting third-party providers opens up interesting

opportunities for monetisation. However, the business models for this are not yet in

place.

Electric bus systems operate under a business model largely based on public service

contracts in which transport authorities compensate operators through performance-

based payments linked to service quality, punctuality, and energy efficiency. Revenue is

also generated through user fares—either collected directly or via integrated ticketing

systems—and supplemented by subsidies or availability payments that help offset the

higher capital costs associated with electrification. Operators may further benefit from

lower fuel and maintenance expenses, which gradually enhance profit margins within

contractual frameworks. While the monetisation of operational data is still limited, some

systems are beginning to explore its potential. In public-private partnership

arrangements, private entities may recover investments over time through long-term

operations, leasing schemes, or bundled services. Overall, the model seeks to deliver

reliable, low-emission transit while ensuring financial sustainability despite significant

upfront costs.

The solution typically generates revenue through a combination of service contracts,

leasing fees, and operational savings. “Parcel lockers are often monetised via leasing or

service agreements with logistics operators who pay for access and maintenance” – City

of Vienna. Micro-hubs can generate income through shared usage fees from multiple

couriers.

In the e-car sharing system, the main revenue comes through the concessions, allowing

companies to establish the service in the city and giving them permits to do so.

Secondary revenues can come from the charging process; cars can charge in e-hubs.

Alternative revenue can come from access to the flexibility market or the pick saving

energy market.

In bidirectional EV charging (V2X) projects, revenue streams primarily come from

providing flexibility services to DSOs. Additional revenues can be generated through

vehicle rental or sharing schemes using V2G-enabled cars. This is the case in Trondheim,

where shared EVs provide grid services. Infrastructure owners may also monetise their

assets by leasing parking and charging spaces specifically equipped for V2G vehicles.

Indirect revenue or savings arise from using the EV battery for local energy storage,

from increasing renewable energy self-consumption, and from reducing contracted grid

capacity, thus optimising energy bills for building or business owners.

Expected

ROI period

Estimate the

time required

to recover the

initial

investment

(e.g., 3–5

years, 10+

years, or not

applicable).

Beyond the hardware and installation costs, capacity utilisation and the development of

the electricity price play a key role in amortisation. While optimistic scenarios envisage

amortisation after just 2 years, most comparative calculations are between 3-6 years.

Amortisation depends on hardware, installation, capacity utilisation, and electricity prices.

Optimistic estimates are 2 years, but most comparative figures suggest 3-6 years.

The estimated time to recover the initial investment for last-mile delivery solutions

typically ranges from 3-5 years, depending on fleet size, infrastructure scale, and

utilisation rates.

The city is normally not the owner of the e-car sharing system. Accordingly, the initial

return on investment in this business is close to zero. Allowing companies to be

established in the city is the only strategy to gain revenues. If profits are obtained from

the V2G chargers, then ROI resembles the bidirectional case study.

The payback period for bidirectional charging solutions depends on energy prices, vehicle

costs and regulatory frameworks. The most important factors in the latter are whether

providing support services to grid operators is allowed or whether these vehicles are used

only as local storage systems.

Insights expected to be gained during implementation

Impact (KPIs)

Describe the

measurable or

perceived outcomes of

the project. Will it

reduce emissions,

improve accessibility,

promote modal shift, or

influence public

behaviour?

Traffic flow/Distance travelled/Failed deliveries/Delivery time/Delivery density/Cost per parcel/Operational cost per day/CO2 emissions per km/CO2 emissions per parcel/EV adoption rate/Cargo bike adoption rate/Cargo

bike deliveries/Companies electrification/Parking fines/Space utilisation efficiency/Reliability of sensors and cameras/Transport infra offer/Warehouse offer/Lockers volume/Micro-hub capacity utilisation/Data sources

used/Data utilisation/Number of partnerships for collaborative logistics/Investment plans/SULP.

CO₂ emissions reduction (Significant decrease in transport-related greenhouse gas emissions—up to 90% per bus compared to diesel equivalents, depending on the energy mix)/Air quality improvement

(Elimination of tailpipe pollutants (NOx, PM), contributing to healthier urban environments)/Noise reduction (Lower noise levels in residential and central areas, improving quality of life and reducing noise-related

health risks)/Modal shift (Enhanced public perception and comfort of electric buses encourages a shift from private cars to public transport)/Operational cost efficiency (Over time, reduced fuel and maintenance

costs contribute to lower lifecycle costs)/Public behaviour influence (Demonstrates city leadership on climate action, reinforcing citizen support for sustainable mobility policies).

Monitoring dashboards often track these KPIs over time, enabling cities to adjust strategy and communicate progress.

Delivery time/Cost per parcel/CO₂ emissions per parcel/Cargo bike adoption rate/Micro-hub capacity utilisation/Failed deliveries/EV adoption rate (in logistics fleet)/Space utilisation efficiency/Number of partnerships for

collaborative logistics/Data utilisation

Replicating e-mobility solutions

In the e-car sharing system, useful KPIs always have a relation with the typical sharing system, including % of use, time parked, distance, and other KPIs from the type of use. E-cars, however, enable introducing new

KPIs about CO2 reduction and noise reduction, whereby going to V2G yields all their indicators, such as hours available for flexibility, savings for peak demand, etc.

Usage as providing grid flexibility/support: Hours available for flexibility or grid support services/Hours of activation providing grid services/Average cost per kWh of flexibility provided

Usage as local battery for self-consumption: Increase in local renewable self-consumption (%)/Peak demand reduction (kW shaved)/Hours of battery availability for local storage functions/Reduction in grid electricity

purchases due to V2G discharging (% or kWh)

Supporting factors

List the enablers that

contributed to success—

such as local policy

support, strong

governance, funding

mechanisms, citizen

demand, or existing

infrastructure.

- Collaboration between the municipality and the private sector when it comes to new solutions regarding operation/business model.

- Data-driven support of the development process for charging infrastructure by visualising charging locations, providing information on stations under planning/construction

- Early involvement of legal expertise to ensure a suitable framework and model for cooperation and sustainable operation of the infrastructure

- Strong public involvement and communication of plans and progress, including benefits for stakeholders and society

- Proactive showcasing of electric mobility in everyday life through the city's own fleet of electric vehicles; Acting as an ambassador for sustainable mobility

Several key enablers have contributed to the successful implementation of electric bus systems:

- Local and national policy support: Clear regulatory targets (e.g., zero-emission zones, Clean Vehicles Directive compliance) created strong momentum and accountability.

- Stable governance structures: Coordinated leadership by regional transport authorities and municipalities ensured alignment across departments (mobility, energy, procurement).

- Dedicated funding mechanisms: Access to national co-financing schemes, EU structural funds, and green financing tools (e.g., EIB loans) reduced financial risk.

- Existing depot and route infrastructure: Leveraging and retrofitting current facilities accelerated deployment and reduced capital investment.

- Growing citizen demand: Public expectations for cleaner, quieter, and more modern public transport strengthened political backing.

- Utility engagement: Early and active involvement of grid operators enabled smooth infrastructure rollout and charging integration.

Municipal support for neutral locker networks, such as the WienBox and NextBox initiatives.

The most important consideration is to have companies interested in establishing their base in the city. Success than merely providing the necessary permits. Apart from this, the most important thing is:

- Organise where to place the e-hub

- Clarify if you want to provide services to the grid

In Trondheim, the success of bidirectional charging projects was facilitated by collaboration between the city council, the grid operator, and technology companies, along with an open regulatory framework for pilot

projects. The active participation of users and car sharing companies was also a key factor.

Lessons learnt

Summarise challenges

encountered during

implementation and

how they were

overcome. Highlight key

takeaways for other

cities looking to

replicate the use case.

Parking regulations are often not compatible with electric vehicles. In general, there was a huge gap between technological development and existing regulations. To overcome that barrier (for example Stockholm),

legal expertise was brought in at a very early stage. In addition, new ways of organising the development of charging infrastructure were taken via innovative collaboration frameworks (e.g. access right agreement).

Several challenges emerged during implementation:

- Grid capacity constraints: Depot and fast-charging infrastructure required early coordination with energy utilities. This was addressed through joint planning and phased grid upgrades.

- Procurement complexity: Initial tenders lacked clear technical specifications for electric operations. Future tenders should include charging compatibility, battery range, and lifecycle cost criteria.

- Cost overruns: Electrification led to unforeseen budget increases (e.g., +43% in Kolumbus' case). A buffer should be built into financial planning, with co-funding mechanisms activated early.

- Public resistance to change: Concerns from drivers and citizens were addressed through engagement campaigns and pilot demonstrations.

- Technology dependence: Heavy reliance on international bus manufacturers highlighted the need for robust warranty terms, cybersecurity protocols, and long-term support agreements.

Key challenges included early battery inefficiencies in retrofitted e-vans and a lack of shared micro-hub operators. As the contact person in Vienna suggested, operational adjustments during the pilot phase allowed

logistics providers to improve fleet performance over time. Initial attempts at shared hubs failed due to limited courier cooperation, but recent success was achieved by embedding multi-user hubs in urban planning

policies.

Typical challenges for car sharing are user acceptance, locations to place the e-hub, people's purchasing power, and accessibility to the city. If the sharing is electric, this adds technology (initial problems in Utrecht with

V2G cars and V2G chargers), the availability of enough power to install chargers in the e-hub, and the proximity to the final user and their buildings, etc.

Key lessons for future bidirectional charging projects include ensuring early and active involvement of all crucial stakeholders, especially Distribution System Operators (DSOs), vehicle owners or fleet operators, and

technology providers, in order to align objectives and technical requirements. Standardisation is essential: selecting interoperable chargers and vehicles that comply with evolving V2G/V2X communication standards

avoids the compatibility issues experienced in early pilots. The implementation of robust monitoring and energy management systems is critical to ensure safe and efficient charge/discharge cycles, particularly when

integrating with the grid or local renewable installations. Another lesson is the importance of designing a viable business model that clearly defines revenue streams (e.g. grid services, flexibility markets, energy storage

for buildings) in order to ensure project profitability. Finally, regulatory frameworks remain a key barrier: projects must engage with local and national regulators early to address legal gaps and enable full deployment

of V2G capabilities.

Expected results

Highlight the outcomes

achieved so far,

including usage data,

satisfaction levels, or

environmental/economic

results. Concrete focus

The provision of charging infrastructure massively supports the switch to electric vehicles

because it ensures that the vehicles can be charged across the board. In addition,

modern approaches to smart charging are capable of stabilising the grids by balancing

energy volumes and enabling new ways of monetisation (see vehicle-to-

grid/bidirectional-charging).

Electric bus system implementations across European cities have shown clear,

measurable outcomes:

Following

steps

Outline any

planned or

recommended

follow-up

actions. Will

the solution be

scaled,

replicated,

integrated

Additional work should focus on new approaches in managing energy flows (smart charging and

bidirectional charging). Furthermore, the charging infrastructure solution module offers a variety of

docking points, e.g. with the vehicle-sharing system or last-mile delivery solutions.

Several cities have been scaling e-bus systems beyond the initial investment co-financed by the

SCC01 projects. The main barrier for further scaling is the decreasing flexibility and availability of

funds, as well as trade restrictions on vehicles.

Follow-up actions might include further scaling of electric fleets and continued expansion of the

parcel locker network. Future steps involve integrating last-mile delivery with multimodal mobility

hubs such as WienMobil stations and promoting shared micro-hub infrastructure in urban expansion

Replicating e-mobility solutions

- Fleet transition: Cities have electrified significant portions of their bus fleets—

typically between 25% and 100%—with deployment of 50 to 200 electric buses per

project.

- Emission reductions: CO₂ emissions from public transport have decreased by up to

50%, with local air pollutants (NOx, PM) effectively eliminated from the electric

fleet's operation.

- User satisfaction: Passenger feedback indicates improved comfort, quieter rides,

and better overall perception of public transport, contributing to a gradual modal

shift from private car use.

- Operational insights: Real-time monitoring systems have enabled data-driven

optimisation of routes, charging schedules, and fleet maintenance.

- Economic results: While upfront costs remain high, cities report decreasing

lifecycle costs over time, especially in areas with stable or subsidised electricity

prices.

Pilots delivered energy savings of approximately –516 kWh per vehicle per year and CO₂

emission reductions of around –758 kg per vehicle annually. By May 2025, over 720

parcel locker stations were successfully integrated city-wide. Resident satisfaction was

high, with no reported resistance and positive acceptance in social housing areas.

One of the main expected results of implementing e-car sharing is reducing the use of

personal cars. Others include reduced CO2 emissions or the availability of power to

supply buildings in the case of bidirectional chargers at the station base.

The expected results of bidirectional charging projects include providing effective support

to Distribution System Operators (DSOs) by enabling EVs to act as flexible grid

resources. Economically, these projects aim to generate additional revenue streams for

vehicle owners or fleet operators through participation in flexibility markets.

Environmentally, bidirectional charging is expected to increase the integration of local

renewable energy by enabling EV batteries to store surplus production and discharge it

when needed. Finally, successful deployment will demonstrate the viability of EVs as both

mobility and energy assets, setting a foundation for wider replication in smart energy

systems.

with other

services, or

monitored

long-term?

zones. Long-term monitoring of operational efficiency and environmental impact is also

recommended to guide replication and further optimisation.

As is evident, the initial step is to speak with solution suppliers to implement e-car sharing.

Importantly, the subsequent steps would be to move to V2G, as in Utrecht. The information they

shared indicates that the price of an e-car can be reduced by 50% merely by allowing the grid to

utilise. E-car sharing, but with a bidirectional component.

Future steps for bidirectional EV charging should focus on improving the technological integration

between vehicles, charging stations, and DSOs in order to ensure that EVs can provide grid

flexibility services. An important aspect is to develop advanced energy management systems (EMS)

to maximise the use of vehicles as local storage for buildings or prosumers. Beyond technical

aspects, a key action will be to create or adapt regulatory frameworks to enable full deployment of

V2X services, facilitating their scaling and integration with other urban energy and mobility systems.

1 views·95 pages

Replicating e-mobility solutions PDF Free Download

Replicating e-mobility solutions PDF free Download. Think more deeply and widely.

Uploaded by Vanessa Buchanan on 4/16/2026

/95

100%

Replicating e-mobility solutions

Alexander Schmidt, Breogan Sanchez, Gregorio Fernandez, Fernando Velazquez, Florian

Herrmann

August 2025

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency

Established by the European Commission

CINEA

Contact: Olav Luyckx

Email: olav.luyckx@ec.europa.eu

European Commission

B-1049 Brussels

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Replicating e-mobility solutions

European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA)

‘Support for the Smart Cities and Communities Lighthouse Project Group’

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Version history

Version

Date

Comments

v.01

28.06.2025

Consolidated version before Validation Workshop

v.02

07.07.2025

Revisions from the Mid-term report integrated

v.03

11.07.2025

Peer-Reviewed (Internal) Final version

v.03b

18.07.2025

Feedback and consent from external contributors

received and integrated.

v.04

25.07.2025

Revisions from AIT integrated

v.05

14.08.2025

Revisions from AIT integrated (proofreading)

v.05b

18.08.2025

Layout check.

v.06

23.08.2025

Revisions from CINEA integrated (proofreading).

Authors:

Alexander Schmidt (BABLE Smart Cities), Breogan Sanchez (BABLE Smart Cities), Gregorio

Fernandez (No affiliation), Fernando Velazquez (No affiliation), Florian Herrmann (Lindholmen

Science Park)

Internal Reviewers

Melike Nur Ülsever (BABLE Smart Cities), Georges El Sayegh (BABLE Smart Cities)

External contributors:

Eva Sunnerstedt (City of Stockholm), Omar Shafqat (Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences

(AUAS/HvA)), Melina Rosendahl (AIT) Anna Kamps (AIT), Miguel Zarzuela (CIRCE Technological

Centre), Matthijs Kok (Gemeente Utrecht), José Alberto Solanas (Zaragoza City Council), Stephan

Hartmann (WieNeu+), Juan Carlos Escudero (City of Vitoria-Gasteiz), Tom Jensen (City of

Trondheim), Jesús Alonso (CEO Solaris bus), Gerd Seehuus (City of Stavanger), Philip Angus

(Nottingham Energy Partnership), Dirk Ahlers (NTNU), Bojan Schnabl (City of Vienna)

LEGAL NOTICE

This document has been prepared for the European Commission. It reflects the views only of the

authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the

information contained therein.

Replicating e-mobility solutions 
 
 
 

 
Table of Contents 
Executive summary ............................................................................................................. 4 
Introduction ............................................................................................................ 6 
State-of-the-art ....................................................................................................... 7 
1 Scientific literature: technical innovation ................................................................... 14 
1.1 Smart charging ................................................................................................... 15 
1.2 Smart charging networks ..................................................................................... 16 
1.3 Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) .......................................................................................... 16 
1.4 Ultra-fast charging technology and low grid impact charge points .............................. 17 
1.5 Smart navigation and charging apps ...................................................................... 17 
1.6 Procedures to allow seamless payment and access across charging providers. ............ 17 
1.7 Wireless (inductive) charging ................................................................................ 18 
1.8 Standardisation of charging protocols .................................................................... 19 
1.9 Battery advancements ......................................................................................... 19 
1.10 State-of-the-art examples in scalable cities’ projects ............................................. 20 
2 Grey literature: Policy measures ................................................................................. 21 
2.1 Policy frameworks supporting e-mobility in cities..................................................... 21 
2.2 Key market trends affecting e-mobility adoption ..................................................... 24 
3 Key insights from the state-of-the-art ......................................................................... 29 
Case studies, multicriteria analysis and evaluation ..................................................... 30 
1 Successful upscaling of e-mobility (methodology) ......................................................... 30 
1.1 Solution modules for the successful introduction and spread of e-mobility .................. 30 
1.2 Success factors for the upscaling of electromobility per solution module..................... 31 
2 Selection of cities ..................................................................................................... 35 
3 Evaluation of the case studies (cities) per solution module ............................................. 41 
3.1 Charging infrastructure – Public charging system .................................................... 42 
3.2 Electrification of fleets – Electric bus system ........................................................... 43 
3.3 Electrification of fleets – Last-mile delivery ............................................................. 44 
3.4 Electrification of fleets – Vehicle-sharing system ..................................................... 46 
3.5 Vehicle-to-grid – Bidirectional electric vehicle charging ............................................ 47 
4 Validation workshops ................................................................................................ 49 
4.1 Onsite workshop – Zaragoza ................................................................................ 49 
4.2 Online final validation workshop ............................................................................ 50 
5 Insights from the selected SCC cities........................................................................... 51 
General conclusions ............................................................................................... 60 
Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 61 
Annex: Guidelines for city practitioners on how to enable and upscale e-mobility solutions ......... 68 
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 68 
2 Key barriers to upscale e-mobility solutions ................................................................. 69 
3 Replication and success factors. Practical six steps for cities to enable e-mobility .............. 74 