pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.00941 · v3 · submitted 2025-11-02 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Traffic-Aware Microgrid Planning for Dynamic Wireless Electric Vehicle Charging Roadways

Dipanjan Ghose , Junjie Qin , S Sivaranjani This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 01:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords dynamic wireless chargingmicrogrid planningelectric vehicle energy demandtraffic flow modelingAC optimal power flowhighway electrificationspatio-temporal demand
0
0 comments X

The pith

Traffic-aware microgrid planning for dynamic wireless EV charging cuts system costs below worst-case traffic assumptions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a planning approach that first models how traffic speed, density, and flow generate time-varying charging demand along a roadway equipped with dynamic wireless chargers. This demand estimate is then fed directly into an AC optimal power flow model that sizes and locates the supporting microgrid components. The central demonstration shows that the resulting design costs less than one built under the assumption of maximum traffic at every moment. A reader might care because dynamic wireless charging promises smaller batteries and fewer stops for long-haul electric trucks, yet the power infrastructure must remain affordable if the technology is to scale. The method is tested on a real segment of I-210W in California across multiple traffic regimes.

Core claim

By coupling the macroscopic cell transmission model to produce spatio-temporal EV charging demand with an AC optimal power flow formulation, the framework produces microgrid designs whose total system cost is significantly lower than designs based on worst-case traffic assumptions, with the advantage demonstrated on a segment of I-210W under a wide range of traffic conditions.

What carries the argument

Coupling of the macroscopic cell transmission model for generating traffic-dependent charging demand with an AC optimal power flow optimization that designs the microgrid.

If this is right

  • Microgrid capacities can be set closer to average rather than peak traffic demand.
  • Total capital investment required for DWC corridors decreases while still satisfying realistic loads.
  • Power-flow constraints can be enforced with demand profiles that vary by time of day and traffic state.
  • The same demand-generation step can be repeated for any corridor where traffic sensor data exist.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same traffic-to-demand link could be reused for stationary fast chargers or mixed passenger-freight fleets.
  • Savings may compound if microgrids incorporate local solar or storage sized to the same variable demand.
  • Adaptive re-optimization using live traffic feeds could further reduce operating costs beyond the static planning result.

Load-bearing premise

The cell transmission model yields charging demand estimates accurate enough to be used directly inside the power-flow optimization without large errors from unmodeled driver behavior or power losses.

What would settle it

If the traffic-aware microgrid design cost on measured I-210W traffic data turns out to be equal to or higher than the worst-case design cost, the claimed cost advantage would be refuted.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.00941 by Dipanjan Ghose, Junjie Qin, S Sivaranjani.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Example system illustrating the influence of traffic flow dynamics on roadway energy demand. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Proposed methodological framework for traffic-aware grid planning in the DWC system. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Key roadway traffic components represented in the CTM-based traffic flow formulation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Selected segment of I-210 West in Los Angeles, California, used for the case study. The segment extends [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Designed 12-bus microgrid system for the DWC planning problem, incorporating solar generation, ES [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Variation of traffic-induced demand across roadway cells under different simulated traffic scenarios [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Graphs illustrating vehicle density, power demand, and their nonlinear dependence on average speed for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Traffic demand from the roadway segment, and its distribution across spatial and temporal scales. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Results for the ES placement optimization illustrating how varying the number of ES units affects the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Baseline traffic flow simulation results showing the variation of generated power by the microgrid compo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Influence of different traffic scenario types on total system cost and optimal sizing of solar capacity, ES, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Effect of traffic-aware grid planning on total system cost. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of optimal solar, ES, and grid coupling capacities in the DWC microgrid with and without [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Dynamic wireless charging (DWC) is an emerging technology that has the potential to reduce charging downtime and on-board battery size, particularly in heavy-duty electric vehicles (EVs). However, its spatiotemporal, dynamic, high-power demands pose challenges for power system operations. Since DWC demand depends on traffic characteristics such as speed, density, and dwell time, effective infrastructure planning must account for the coupling between traffic behavior and EV energy consumption. In this paper, we propose a novel traffic-aware microgrid planning framework for DWC. First, we use the macroscopic cell transmission model to estimate spatio-temporal EV charging demand along DWC corridors and integrate this demand into an AC optimal power flow formulation to design a supporting microgrid. Our framework explicitly links traffic patterns with energy demand and demonstrates that traffic-aware microgrid planning yields significantly lower system costs than worst-case traffic-based approaches. We demonstrate the performance of our model on a segment of I-210W in California under a wide range of traffic conditions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a traffic-aware microgrid planning framework for dynamic wireless charging (DWC) roadways. It uses the macroscopic cell transmission model (CTM) to estimate spatio-temporal EV charging demand from traffic patterns (density, speed) and integrates this demand vector into an AC optimal power flow (OPF) formulation to size and design the supporting microgrid. The central claim, demonstrated on an I-210W segment in California, is that traffic-aware planning yields significantly lower system costs than worst-case traffic-based approaches under a range of traffic conditions.

Significance. If the central claim holds after addressing the demand-modeling gaps, the work would be significant for eess.SY because it provides an explicit coupling between macroscopic traffic dynamics and AC power-flow-based microgrid design for high-power DWC infrastructure. This addresses a practical challenge in EV corridor planning where demand is both spatio-temporal and traffic-dependent, and the comparison to worst-case baselines offers a concrete, falsifiable improvement metric that could inform standards for DWC roadway microgrids.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3] Section 3: The mapping from CTM density and speed to instantaneous power demand uses a constant efficiency factor and a fixed per-vehicle charging curve. This omits acceleration transients, lane-change effects, and vehicle-to-road alignment variance. If these factors raise true peak demand by even 10-15% on the I-210W segment, the cost advantage reported in the AC OPF results would be reduced or reversed, undermining the central claim that traffic-aware planning is superior to worst-case approaches.
  2. [Results section] Results section (and abstract): The manuscript states that the framework yields lower costs but provides no quantitative cost deltas, error metrics on the CTM-to-demand conversion, or validation against real traffic/charging data. Without these, it is impossible to assess whether the AC OPF solutions are robust or whether the claimed savings are load-bearing.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract claims 'significantly lower system costs' without any numerical values or confidence intervals; moving at least one key comparative metric (e.g., total cost reduction percentage) into the abstract would improve readability.
  2. [Section 3] Notation for the efficiency factor and charging curve in the demand model should be defined explicitly with units and any assumed constants listed in a table for reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, proposing targeted revisions where appropriate to strengthen the presentation of the traffic-aware microgrid planning framework.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 3] Section 3: The mapping from CTM density and speed to instantaneous power demand uses a constant efficiency factor and a fixed per-vehicle charging curve. This omits acceleration transients, lane-change effects, and vehicle-to-road alignment variance. If these factors raise true peak demand by even 10-15% on the I-210W segment, the cost advantage reported in the AC OPF results would be reduced or reversed, undermining the central claim that traffic-aware planning is superior to worst-case approaches.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the demand mapping in Section 3 employs a constant efficiency factor and a fixed per-vehicle charging curve, which represents a simplification that excludes acceleration transients, lane-change effects, and alignment variance. These omissions could affect peak demand estimates. To directly address the concern about robustness, we will add a sensitivity analysis in the revised results section. This analysis will vary the efficiency factor by ±15% (and similarly perturb the charging curve parameters) and recompute the AC OPF solutions for both the traffic-aware and worst-case traffic scenarios on the I-210W segment. The updated results will report the resulting changes in total system cost, thereby quantifying whether the cost advantage persists under these perturbations. We note that a fully microscopic traffic model incorporating these effects would be computationally prohibitive for corridor-scale planning and is outside the intended scope of the macroscopic CTM-based framework. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results section] Results section (and abstract): The manuscript states that the framework yields lower costs but provides no quantitative cost deltas, error metrics on the CTM-to-demand conversion, or validation against real traffic/charging data. Without these, it is impossible to assess whether the AC OPF solutions are robust or whether the claimed savings are load-bearing.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation. Although the full manuscript presents numerical results comparing costs under different traffic conditions on the I-210W segment, we agree that explicit quantitative cost deltas, error metrics for the CTM-to-demand mapping, and clearer validation statements were not sufficiently highlighted in the abstract or results section. In the revision we will (i) update the abstract and results to report specific percentage cost reductions (e.g., total microgrid cost savings relative to the worst-case baseline across the tested traffic scenarios), (ii) include error bounds derived from CTM parameter uncertainty in the demand estimation, and (iii) add a dedicated paragraph clarifying that the framework is validated against real traffic flow and density data from the I-210W corridor while noting that direct empirical DWC charging measurements are not yet available for this emerging technology. These additions will make the claimed savings and robustness more transparent. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation uses independent external models

full rationale

The paper's core chain applies the standard macroscopic cell transmission model (CTM) to generate spatio-temporal demand profiles from traffic data, then feeds those profiles as fixed inputs into an AC optimal power flow (OPF) optimization for microgrid sizing. Both CTM and AC OPF are externally established techniques with no evidence of self-definition, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations that reduce the claimed cost savings to the inputs by construction. The traffic-aware versus worst-case comparison simply re-runs the same non-circular pipeline on different demand vectors, preserving independent content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Ledger constructed from abstract description only; full paper likely contains additional fitted parameters and modeling assumptions not visible here.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Macroscopic cell transmission model accurately estimates spatio-temporal EV charging demand from traffic speed, density, and dwell time.
    Invoked as the first step of the framework in the abstract.
  • domain assumption AC optimal power flow formulation can incorporate the traffic-derived demand to produce a supporting microgrid design.
    Core integration step stated in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5706 in / 1296 out tokens · 30792 ms · 2026-05-18T01:40:56.147613+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Z. Ye, M. A. Bragin, N. Yu, R. Wei, Joint planning of dynamic wireless charging lanes and powerdeliveryinfrastructureforheavy-dutydrayagetrucks, AppliedEnergy375(2024)124029. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124029. 33

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124029 2024

  2. [2]

    J. Shi, H. O. Gao, Efficient energy management of wireless charging roads with energy storage for coupled transportation–power systems, Applied Energy 323 (2022) 119619.doi:10.1016/ j.apenergy.2022.119619

    work page arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    INDOT, Wireless Electric Vehicle Charging Solution for Highway Infrastructure, last Modified: 2022-09-12T19:21:25-04:00 (Aug. 2021). URLhttps://www.in.gov/indot/current-programs/innovative-programs/ wireless-electric-vehicle-charging-solution-for-highway-infrastructure/

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Lozanova, Dynamic wireless charging for electric vehicles, accessed: 2025-09-01 (Sep 2025)

    S. Lozanova, Dynamic wireless charging for electric vehicles, accessed: 2025-09-01 (Sep 2025). URLhttps://www.greenlancer.com/post/dynamic-wireless-charging-electric-vehicles

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    V. N. Galigekere, B. Ozpineci, High power and dynamic wireless charging of electric vehicles (evs), Tech. rep., Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (June 2021)

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    URLhttps://electreon.com/projects/trondheim-electric-road-project

    Electreon, Trondheim electric road project, Web page, first wireless Electric Road System in Norway, planned construction and operation start 2024; accessed October 26, 2025 (2023). URLhttps://electreon.com/projects/trondheim-electric-road-project

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    47–84.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75961-6_3

    A.Ferrara, S.Sacone, S.Siri, First-OrderMacroscopicTrafficModels, in: A.Ferrara, S.Sacone, S.Siri(Eds.), FreewayTrafficModellingandControl, SpringerInternationalPublishing, Cham, 2018, pp. 47–84.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75961-6_3

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75961-6_3 2018

  8. [8]

    C. F. Daganzo, The cell transmission model: A dynamic representation of highway traffic consistent with the hydrodynamic theory, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 28 (4) (1994) 269–287

    work page 1994

  9. [9]

    Lukic, Z

    S. Lukic, Z. Pantic, Cutting the Cord: Static and Dynamic Inductive Wireless Charging of Electric Vehicles, IEEE Electrification Magazine 1 (1) (2013) 57–64.doi:10.1109/MELE.2013. 2273228

    work page doi:10.1109/mele.2013 2013

  10. [10]

    Panchal, S

    C. Panchal, S. Stegen, J. Lu, Review of static and dynamic wireless electric vehicle charging system, Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 21 (5) (2018) 922–937. doi:10.1016/j.jestch.2018.06.015

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jestch.2018.06.015 2018

  11. [11]

    A. J. Sauter, J. D. Lara, J. Turk, J. Milford, B.-M. Hodge, Power system operational impacts of electric vehicle dynamic wireless charging, Applied Energy 364 (2024) 123002.doi:10. 1016/j.apenergy.2024.123002

    work page arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Fonseca, L

    T. Fonseca, L. L. Ferreira, B. Cabral, R. Severino, K. Nweye, D. Ghose, Z. Nagy, EVLearn: extending the cityLearn framework with electric vehicle simulation, Energy Informatics 8 (1) (2025) 16.doi:10.1186/s42162-024-00445-w

    work page doi:10.1186/s42162-024-00445-w 2025

  13. [13]

    Ghose, Studying present and future electric vehicle impacts on the city of austin’s power grid, Master’s thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, master’s Thesis (Apr

    D. Ghose, Studying present and future electric vehicle impacts on the city of austin’s power grid, Master’s thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, master’s Thesis (Apr. 2023)

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    S. Liu, D. Z. Wang, Q. Tian, Y. H. Lin, Optimal configuration of dynamic wireless charging facilities considering electric vehicle battery capacity, Transportation Research Part E 181 (2024) 103376. 34

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    D. M. Nguyen, M. A. Kishk, M.-S. Alouini, Dynamic charging as a complementary approach in modern EV charging infrastructure, Scientific Reports 14 (1) (2024) 5785, publisher: Nature Publishing Group.doi:10.1038/s41598-024-55863-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-024-55863-3 2024

  16. [16]

    Y. Wang, M. Ma, S. Liang, Y. Wang, N. Liu, Optimal control strategy for electric vehicle platoons in dynamic wireless charging lane considering charge demand differences, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 655 (2024) 130190.doi:10.1016/j.physa.2024. 130190

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physa.2024 2024

  17. [17]

    Majidi, M

    M. Majidi, M. Parvania, Dynamic in-motion wireless charging systems: Modelling and coordi- nated hierarchical operation in distribution systems, IET Generation, Transmission & Distri- bution 18 (20) (2024) 3151–3160.doi:10.1049/gtd2.13212

    work page doi:10.1049/gtd2.13212 2024

  18. [18]

    Y. Wang, Y. Zhou, X. Yan, Reliable dynamic wireless charging infrastructure deployment problem for public transport services, European Journal of Operational Research 313 (2) (2024) 747–766.doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2023.08.053

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2023.08.053 2024

  19. [19]

    A. O. Elmeligy, E. Elghanam, M. S. Hassan, A. H. Osman, A. A. Shalaby, M. Shaaban, Optimal Planning of Dynamic Wireless Charging Infrastructure for Electric Vehicles, IEEE Access 12 (2024) 30661–30673.doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3365636

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2024.3365636 2024

  20. [20]

    H. Ngo, A. Kumar, S. Mishra, Optimal positioning of dynamic wireless charging infrastructure in a road network for battery electric vehicles, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 85 (2020) 102385.doi:10.1016/j.trd.2020.102385

    work page doi:10.1016/j.trd.2020.102385 2020

  21. [21]

    Zaheer, M

    A. Zaheer, M. Neath, H. Z. Z. Beh, G. A. Covic, A Dynamic EV Charging System for Slow Moving Traffic Applications, IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification 3 (2) (2017) 354–369.doi:10.1109/TTE.2016.2628796

    work page doi:10.1109/tte.2016.2628796 2017

  22. [22]

    N. Aung, W. Zhang, K. Sultan, S. Dhelim, Y. Ai, Dynamic traffic congestion pricing and electric vehicle charging management system for the internet of vehicles in smart cities, Digital Communications and Networks 7 (4) (2021) 492–504.doi:10.1016/j.dcan.2021.01.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.dcan.2021.01.002 2021

  23. [23]

    Karakitsios, E

    I. Karakitsios, E. Karfopoulos, N. Hatziargyriou, Impact of dynamic and static fast inductive charging of electric vehicles on the distribution network, Electric Power Systems Research 140 (2016) 107–115

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    R. Sun, Q. Luo, Y. Chen, Optimizing dynamic wireless charging for electric buses: A data- driven approach to infrastructure planning, Applied Energy 373 (2024) 123912.doi:10.1016/ j.apenergy.2024.123912

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Chudnovsky and S

    P. Aduama, A. S. Al-Sumaiti, K. H. Al-Hosani, A. R. El-Shamy, Optimizing quasi-dynamic wireless charging for urban electric buses: A two-scenario mathematical framework with grid and PV-battery systems, Heliyon 10 (15), publisher: Elsevier (Aug. 2024).doi:10.1016/j. heliyon.2024.e34857

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2024

  26. [26]

    Majidi, M

    M. Majidi, M. Parvania, Spatio-Temporal Impact Analysis of Dynamic Wireless Charging of Electric Vehicles on Power Distribution Systems, in: 2024 18th International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS), 2024, pp. 1–6, iSSN: 2642-6757. 35

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    Farivar, S

    M. Farivar, S. H. Low, Branch Flow Model: Relaxations and Convexification—Part I, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 28 (3) (2013) 2554–2564.doi:10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2255317

    work page doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2013.2255317 2013

  28. [28]

    Alimardani, J

    F. Alimardani, J. S. Baras, Performance assessment of different cell-transmission models for ramp-metered highway networks, in: IFAC symposium on control in transportation systems, Vol. 54 of IFAC-PapersOnLine, Elsevier, 2021, pp. 114–120, number: 2

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    C. F. Daganzo, Traffic density estimation with the cell transmission model, in: Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, IEEE, 1994, pp. 2221–2225.doi: 10.1109/CDC.1994.1240418. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.1994.1240418

    work page doi:10.1109/cdc.1994.1240418 1994

  30. [30]

    Munoz, X

    L. Munoz, X. Sun, D. Sun, G. Gomes, R. Horowitz, Methodological calibration of the cell transmission model, in: Proceedings of the 2004 American Control Conference, Vol. 1, 2004, pp. 798–803 vol.1, iSSN: 0743-1619.doi:10.23919/ACC.2004.1383703

    work page doi:10.23919/acc.2004.1383703 2004

  31. [31]

    Haddad, T

    D. Haddad, T. Konstantinou, D. Aliprantis, K. Gkritza, S. Pekarek, J. Haddock, Analysis of the financial viability of high-powered electric roadways: A case study for the state of Indiana, Energy Policy 171 (2022)

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    AARoads Interstate Guide, Interstate 210 california,https://www.aaroads.com/ interstate-guide/i-210-ca/, retrieved July 20, 2025 (2018)

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    California Department of Transportation, Caltrans PeMS,https://pems.dot.ca.gov/, re- trieved July 20, 2025 (2025)

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    A. Kurzhanskiy, CTMSIM - an interactive freeway traffic macrosim- ulator,https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/ 21977-ctmsim-an-interactive-freeway-traffic-macrosimulator, mATLAB Central File Exchange. Retrieved September 6, 2025 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Federal Highway Administration, Traffic monitoring guide - updated october 2016, accessed: 2025-09-01 (Oct. 2016). URLhttps://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/50512

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    Haddad, T

    D. Haddad, T. Konstantinou, D. Aliprantis, K. Gkritza, S. Pekarek, J. Haddock, Analysis of the financial viability of high-powered electric roadways: A case study for the state of Indiana, Energy Policy 171, publisher: Elsevier Ltd (Dec. 2022).doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113275

    work page doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113275 2022

  37. [37]

    Sivak, States with the highest and lowest truck traffic on interstate highways,https: //www.greencarcongress.com/2021/03/20210316-sivak.html, blog: Green Car Congress

    M. Sivak, States with the highest and lowest truck traffic on interstate highways,https: //www.greencarcongress.com/2021/03/20210316-sivak.html, blog: Green Car Congress. Sivak Applied Research. Accessed: 2025-07-20 (2021)

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    California Department of Transportation, Truck lane use,https://dot.ca.gov/programs/ traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/truck-lane-use, accessed: 2025-07-20 (2025)

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    I. E. Agency, Global EV outlook 2023: Trends in electric heavy-duty vehicles, Tech. rep., International Energy Agency (2023). URLhttps://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2023/ trends-in-electric-heavy-duty-vehicles 36

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Solar power data for integration studies, https://www.nrel.gov/grid/solar-power-data, retrieved July 21, 2025 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    Texas A&M University, Electric Grid Test Case Repository, ACTIVSg10k: 10000-bus syn- thetic grid on footprint of western United States,https://electricgrids.engr.tamu.edu/ electric-grid-test-cases/activsg10k/, retrieved July 21, 2025 (2025)

    work page 2025

  42. [42]

    Ramasamy, J

    V. Ramasamy, J. Zuboy, M. Woodhouse, E. O’Shaughnessy, D. Feldman, J. Desai, A. Walker, R. Margolis, P. Basore, U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmarks, With Minimum Sustainable Price Analysis: Q1 2023, Renewable Energy (2023)

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    Tesla, Inc., Megapack – Utility-Scale Energy Storage,https://www.tesla.com/megapack, accessed July 21, 2025 (2025)

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Esgc: Energy storage cost and performance,https:// www.pnnl.gov/projects/esgc-cost-performance/lithium-ion-battery, accessed: 2025- 06-02 (2023)

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    J. I. Giraldez Miner, F. Flores-Espino, S. MacAlpine, P. Asmus, Phase I Microgrid Cost Study: Data Collection and Analysis of Microgrid Costs in the United States, Tech. rep., National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (United States) (Oct. 2018).doi:10. 2172/1477589. URLhttp://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1477589/

    work page arXiv 2018

  46. [46]

    J. J. Grainger, W. D. Stevenson, Power System Analysis, McGraw-Hill, 1994, google-Books-ID: 74NB91nQSTEC. 37

    work page 1994