applied

sciences
Article
Technical Energy Assessment and Sizing of a Second Life
Battery Energy Storage System for a Residential Building
Equipped with EV Charging Station
Farhad Salek, Shahaboddin Resalati *, Denise Morrey, Paul Henshall and Aydin Azizi

Faculty of Technology, Design and Environment, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: This study investigates the design and sizing of the second life battery energy storage
system applied to a residential building with an EV charging station. Lithium-ion batteries have an
approximate remaining capacity of 75–80% when disposed from Electric Vehicles (EV). Given the
increasing demand of EVs, aligned with global net zero targets, and their associated environmental
impacts, the service life of these batteries, could be prolonged with their adoption in less demanding
second life applications. In this study, a technical assessment of an electric storage system based on
second life batteries from electric vehicles (EVs) is conducted for a residential building in the UK,
including an EV charging station. The technical and energy performance of the system is evaluated,
considering different scenarios and assuming that the EV charging load demand is added to the
off-grid photovoltaic (PV) system equipped with energy storage. Furthermore, the Nissan Leaf
second life batteries are used as the energy storage system in this study. The proposed off-grid solar
driven energy system is modelled and simulated using MATLAB Simulink. The system is simulated
on a mid-winter day with minimum solar irradiance and maximum energy demand, as the worst case
Citation: Salek, F.; Resalati, S.; scenario. A switch for the PV system has been introduced to control the overcharging of the second
Morrey, D.; Henshall, P.; Azizi, A. life battery pack. The results demonstrate that adding the EV charging load to the off-grid system
Technical Energy Assessment and
increased the instability of the system. This, however, could be rectified by connecting additional
Sizing of a Second Life Battery
battery packs (with a capacity of 5.850 kWh for each pack) to the system, assuming that increasing
Energy Storage System for a
the PV installation area is not possible due to physical limitations on site.
Residential Building Equipped with
EV Charging Station. Appl. Sci. 2022,
Keywords: second life batteries; off-grid PV system; residential building; EV charging station
12, 11103. https://doi.org/10.3390/
app122111103

Academic Editor: Luisa F. Cabeza

Received: 29 September 2022 1. Introduction

Accepted: 31 October 2022 Global concerns surrounding the decarbonization of energy systems have notably
Published: 2 November 2022 increased over the past years [1]. Distributed energy generation systems such as PV panels
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
are one of the most promising technologies primarily contributing to the building service
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
industry [2]. However, the main improvement to the technology has been in connection
published maps and institutional affil- with the electrochemical efficiency of the PV cells [3]. Despite notable technological ad-
iations. vancements, there are various technical challenges associated with their adoption in the
building sector including the mismatch in the supply and demand timing. One of the
possible solutions to address this challenge is to install electric storage systems (ESS) [4].
The ESS, integrated with the renewable energy systems equipped with PV panels, espe-
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. cially in the stand-alone (off-grid) systems, is used for peak shaving and power shifting
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. from day time to peak load hours (mostly evenings) [5]. In stand-alone renewable energy
This article is an open access article systems in buildings, the total energy demand is supplied by solar or other renewable
distributed under the terms and energy sources [6], making the energy supply and demand management an integral part of
conditions of the Creative Commons the system [7,8].
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
The energy storage systems although contributing positively to the energy manage-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
ment solutions, have considerable environmental impacts [9]. This is mainly associated
4.0/).

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122111103 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 2 of 19

with the extraction of raw materials such as Cobalt, Nickel, and Lithium, and energy
intensive processes when manufacturing Lithium-ion batteries [10]. This impact, however,
could be reduced by prolonging the service life of the batteries retired from their first appli-
cation in EVs, to less demanding applications such as residential buildings [11]. The initial
state of health (SoH) of the second life batteries in such applications is generally around
75–80% of their nominal capacity [12]. Such second life applications are also expected to
provide financial benefits making renewable energy more affordable and desirable for the
end-users [13].
Lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles are considered second life when their
capacity reaches 80% of their initial value. The lithium-ion batteries can be used in less-
stressed applications such as buildings until their end of life. In order to achieve highest life
span of the SLBSs, the load stress applied to them should be minimized. For grid-connected
systems, it will be managed by the battery management system (BMS) which controls the
energy flow through the SLBs, and mostly the extra demand will be applied to the grid.
However, in stand-alone systems, the stress level and variations of the load applied to the
SLBs are higher than grid-connected systems. In addition, the size of the PVs and SLBs
plays a key role in the stand-alone system to find the optimum energy performance of
the system as well as achieving the highest life span for the SLBs. On the other hand, as
the number of electric vehicles increases, more buildings are equipped with EV charging
stations applying a significant extra load to the building energy storage system which
may directly affect the SLBs service life. This is the case especially when these systems are
designed to cover the building demands excluding EVCS.
Numerous studies have investigated the application of second life batteries for ESS
in residential buildings. Hart et al. [14] studied second life batteries in a micro-grid using
an equivalent circuit model (ECM) and validated the model against the experimental data.
Furthermore, the performance of the microgrid with different architectures was assessed.
The results demonstrated that the second life batteries could be successfully installed in
grid-connected or islanded microgrid applications uninterrupting the normal operation of
the system. Sun et al. [13] have introduced the integration of a 3 MW second life battery
ESS with the grid for peak shaving in China. The mathematical modelling of the system
as well as a cost-effective model for the BSS is developed. It has been demonstrated
that employment of second life batteries in the grid for peak shaving in China is cost
beneficial, especially for the grid companies. The impacts of the second life battery packs
with a different state of health (SoH) on the performance of the system was investigated
by Mathews et al. [15]. The semi-empirical degradation model was used for modelling
demonstrating that second life batteries are comparatively more profitable than first life
batteries in PV systems. Cusenza et al. [9] developed a mathematical model for the second
life battery sizing and optimization of a stand-alone PV system for a net zero energy
residential building. The second life battery sizing was performed to achieve the best load
match of the building and the results confirmed the optimum ratio of battery size to PVs
total power to achieve the best load match in the residential buildings.
Further, Uddin et al. [16], modelled a grid-connected residential building equipped
with PV and second life ESS considering building demand in various times during the
year. The ECM was used to predict the battery parameters at different times and estimated
the battery degradation parameters. The results of their work demonstrated that by
considering degradation effects on financial parameters, the second life batteries are no
longer cost effective for the customers. The technical assessment of integration of second
life batteries with grid-connected PV systems for a residential building is demonstrated in
Assuncao et al. [17], by considering a typical European residential building load demand.
MATLAB Simulink was used to model the proposed system for three scenarios: without
storage, large (Nissan Leaf), and small (Citroen C0) second life battery energy storage
system. In the first year, the employment of second life BSS resulted in a reduction of 82.1%
and 78.8% in energy exchange between the building and the grid for large and small BSS,
respectively. Tong et al. [18] has investigated the integration of second life batteries with an
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 3 of 19

off-grid EV charging station in the United States, where MATLAB SIMULINK has been
applied for mathematical modelling of the proposed system. The charging station cost
was significantly reduced in some locations, along with the similar performance compared
to new batteries in other places. It was evident from the reviewed literature that the
integration of the second life battery ESS for a residential building with EV charging station
has not been investigated. The main contribution of this study is to reveal the impacts
of load increase on the sizing of the second life battery energy storage system. The load
applied to the second life battery storage system in this study is the residential building
electricity load plus EV charging station.The EV charging stations apply an extra load to
the residential building load demand [19].
Accordingly, in this study, the design and sizing of the second life battery ESS applied
to a residential building with an EV charging station is investigated. The proposed system
is modelled using MATLAB SIMULINK. The performance and stability of the system is
assessed in a day in the middle of the winter, with the lowest solar irradiance and highest
demand. The assessment considers the second life battery ESS with a different number of
packs. It is assumed that the roof area is fully covered with PVs, therefore, the energy supply
demand mismatch and the system stability maintenance is accomplished by adjusting the
ESS size. The energy assessment and SoH analysis are performed to compare the system
energy exchange, degradation, and energy supply demand mismatch in various scenarios.

2. System Description
The study is based on an off-grid PV system designed for the energy consumption
of a typical house located in Oxford, UK. The study assesses the impacts of adding EVCS
demand on the ESS technical parameters, energy exchange, and degradation. The proposed
off-grid renewable energy system with an EVCS component could be listed as PV panels,
DC-DC converter, second life battery packs, DC-AC inverter, residential building’ load,
and EVCS. The block diagram and components of the proposed energy system is shown in
Figure 1. According to the figure, the solar energy is converted to electrical energy by PV
panels and some of the generated electrical energy will be stored in the second life battery
packs, while the rest of the energy would be consumed directly by the AC consumers such
as the residential building electric consumers and EVCS. The load demand profiles are
presented in Figure 2 [20,21]. The demand profile represents the average UK household
load according to the CREST demand model for 15,000 households in the UK [21]. The red
line in Figure 2 indicates the building’s daily electricity load. The EV charging station daily
load applied to the system is also shown by the black line in Figure 2. The aggregate hourly
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 18
load is also calculated based on the building and EV charging station loads as presented in
Figure 2.

Figure1.1.Schematic
Figure Schematicblock
blockdiagram
diagramof
ofthe
theproposed
proposedoff-grid
off-gridenergy
energysystem.
system.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 4 of 19

Figure 1. Schematic block diagram of the proposed off-grid energy system.

Figure 1. Schematic block diagram of the proposed off-grid energy system.

Figure 2. Different
Figure 2. Different load
load demands
demands applied
applied to
to system
system [20,21].
[20,21].

Figures 3 and 4 demonstrate the block diagrams of the solar system and the second
life battery pack. The SoC is monitored frequently during the solution of the model and
is used
Solar radiation for controlling the switches in the PV system to prevent battery packs from over
calculation
charging. A MATLAB function is used to calculate the solar irradiance in different times
during Figure 2. Different
the day, loadofdemands
the details applied
which will to system
be presented in [20,21].
the next section (see Figure 4).
Input time

PV panels

Solar radiation calculation

Input time

PV panels

Switch

Switch

Figure 3. Block diagram of the solar PV system in MATLAB SIMULINK.

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 18

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 5 of 19

Figure 3. Block diagram of the solar PV system in MATLAB SIMULINK.

Figure4.4.Block
Figure Blockdiagram
diagramof
ofthe
the2nd
2ndlife
lifeNissan
NissanLeaf
Leafbattery
batterypack
packin
inMATLAB
MATLABSIMULINK.
SIMULINK.

TableIn1.this
Thestudy,
definedthree scenarios
scenarios in thisfor the off-grid PV system are defined and assessed as
study.
presented in Table 1. For the base scenario, two 2nd life battery packs connected in parallel
Scenarios Number of Battery Packs Number of PVs Load Demand
are used, and only residential building demand is applied to the system. The second life
Base 2 15
batteries and the solar PVs specifications are provided in Tables 2 and 3. There are RB 15 s life
modulesEV-2P 2
in each battery pack (Figure 4) and the PV panels15are connected with
RB +a EVCS
5 parallel
EV-3P
and 3 series configuration (Figure 3).3 15 RB + EVCS
EV-4P 4 15 RB + EVCS
Table 1. The defined scenarios in this study.
Table 2. Second life battery pack specifications [22].
Scenarios Number of Battery Packs Number of PVs Load Demand
Base
Parameter2 15
ValueRB
EV-2P Model2 15 Nissan
RB Leaf
+ EVCS
EV-3P Number of modules 3 in the pack 15 15 + EVCS
RB
EV-4P Modules configuration 4 in the pack 15 RB + EVCS
series
Module nominal voltage [V] 7.5
Table 2. Second life batterymaximum
Module pack specifications
voltage [22].
[V] 8.3
Module minimum voltage [V] 5
Parameter Value
Initial state of charge [%] 60
Model Nissan Leaf
Second life module initial capacity [Ah]
Number of modules in the pack 15
47.026
Modules configuration in the pack series
Table 3. Solar
ModulePV panel
nominalspecifications
voltage [V][23]. 7.5
Module maximum voltage [V] 8.3
Parameter
Module minimum voltage [V] Value
5
Model
Initial state of charge [%] Amerisolar-6
60 M 360 W
Second life module
Voltage initial capacity
at maximum power [Ah]
[V] 47.026
38.7
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 6 of 19

Table 3. Solar PV panel specifications [23].

Parameter Value
Model Amerisolar-6 M 360 W
Voltage at maximum power [V] 38.7
Current at maximum power [A] 9.31
Open circuit voltage [V] 47.3
Panel efficiency [%] 18.55
Maximum power [W] 360
Cell number 72

3. Mathematical Modelling
As mentioned in the previous section, the mathematical modelling of the proposed
system is performed in MATLAB SIMULINK software using the Simscape toolbox. The PV
panel and batteries with other components are added to the SIMULINK environment and
connected to each other with the desired architecture.

3.1. Solar PV Panels

For calculation of the solar irradiance based on the geographic location (Oxford,
UK) and other technical parameters such as the tilt angle of the panel, a model has been
designed in MATLAB function in SIMULINK, which calculates the solar irradiance in
various simulation steps. For the calculation of beam radiation incidence angle on a surface
(θ), Equation (1) is employed [24]:

cos θ = sin δ sin ϕ cos β − sin δ cos ϕ sin β cos γ + cos δ cos ϕ cos β cos ω
(1)
+ cos δ sin ϕ sin β cos γ cos ω + cos δ sin β sin γ sin ω

where δ, ϕ, β, ω and γ are declination, latitude, slope, hour angle and surface azimuth
angle, respectively [24]. γ and β are assumed to be 0◦ and 30◦ , respectively, since most of
the houses in the UK has 30◦ slope on their ceilings, where PV panels arebe installed. The
equation of Cooper is used for calculation of declination [24]:
 
284 + n
δ = 23.45 sin 360 (2)
365

where n is the number of days during the year. Further, the radiation on the tilted plane
(Go ) could be calculated by Equation (3) [24,25]:
 
360n
Go = Gsc 1 + 0.0033 cos (3)
365

where Gsc is extraterrestrial radiation and assumed as 1367 W/m2 in this study [1]. To
calculate the beam and diffuse radiations transmitted through a clear atmosphere, the
following equations are applied based on Hottel’s method [1,24]:

−k
 
τb = a0 + a1 exp (4)
cos θz

τd = 0.271 − 0.294τb (5)

τb and τd are the atmospheric transmittance for beam and diffuse radiations, consecu-
tively. Further information about the parameters used in Equations (4) and (5) (such as k, a0
and a1 ) can be found in this reference [24]. Finally, the clear-sky radiation (Gc ) is obtained
using Equation (6) [24]:
Gc = Go (τb + τd ) (6)
 Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 7 of 19

The output current of the PV panel is given by [26]:

V + I ∗ Rs
   V + I ∗R 
V + I ∗ Rs s
∗
I pv = I ph − Is e N ∗ V t −1 − Is2 e 2 t − 1 −
N V
(7)
Rp
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
where, Is and Is2 are diode saturation currents for diodes 1 and 2 shown in Figure 5,
respectively. Vt is the thermal voltage, N and N2 are diode emission coefficients and I ph
is solar-generated current, respectively. The mentioned PV parameters are obtained from
from MATLAB
MATLAB SIMULINKSIMULINK Simscape
Simscape library library
for Amerisolar PVfor Amerisolar
panel PV panel
the specifications the
of which speci
are
of provided
which arein Table 3 [26]. in Table 3 [26].
provided

Figure
Figure 5. Block
5. Block diagram
diagram of the of the equivalent
equivalent circuit
circuit used used for
for modeling PVmodeling PV cell in
cell in MATLAB. MATLAB.
3.2. Second Life Battery Pack
3.2.Rint
Second Life Battery Pack
ECM [27] was used for modelling the second life batteries in this study. Besides,
the ECMRint ECM
model [27] was
contains used
an ideal for modelling
voltage the second
source representative life batteries
of OCV in this
as the function of study.
SoC with resistors to calculate the internal ohmic losses [28]. The output
the ECM model contains an ideal voltage source representative of OCV as of this systems is the fun
calculated by the following Equation (8):
SoC with resistors to calculate the internal ohmic losses [28]. The output of this sy
calculated by the following Equation
Vk = VOC,k(8):
− Ik Rs (8)

The experimental data for the parameters𝑉in=this 𝑉 model

, − 𝐼is𝑅obtained from the litera-
ture [22,29–31]. In Nissan Leaf prismatic module, there are two cells integrated in a series
The experimental
configuration. data
In the reference forthe
[22], the parameters
Nissan in this
Leaf battery model
is aged usingis an
obtained from the l
accelerated
[22,29–31].
ageing profileIn Nissan
(Figure Leafinprismatic
6) [22] module,
which the second lifethere areare
modules twoput
cells
underintegrated
constant in a se
current-voltage charging (=1C) and constant current discharging (=1C) at 25 ◦ C environ-
figuration. In the reference [22], the Nissan Leaf battery is aged using an accelera
mental temperature. The reference performance test (RTP) is done every 25 cycles to
ing profile (Figure 6) [22] in which the second life modules are put under constant
measure the module capacity fade and HPPC test [22]. The HPPC test results are used to fit
voltage
ECM charging
Rint model (=1C) the
parameters and constant
results current
of which discharging
are shown (=1C) at 25 °C enviro
in Figures 7–9.
temperature. The reference performance test (RTP) is done every 25 cycles to mea
module capacity fade and HPPC test [22]. The HPPC test results are used to fit E
model parameters the results of which are shown in Figures 7–9.

1C
Current
Voltage
Max voltage

C/2

C/3
Current [A]

Voltage [V]

C/20
C/33

C/3

C/2
 figuration. In the reference [22], the Nissan Leaf battery is aged using an accelerated age-
ing profile (Figure 6) [22] in which the second life modules are put under constant current-
voltage charging (=1C) and constant current discharging (=1C) at 25 °C environmental
temperature. The reference performance test (RTP) is done every 25 cycles to measure the
module
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 capacity fade and HPPC test [22]. The HPPC test results are used to fit ECM Rint
8 of 19

model parameters the results of which are shown in Figures 7–9.

1C
Current
Voltage
Max voltage

C/2

C/3
Current [A]

Voltage [V]
C/20
C/33

C/3

C/2

1C

Min voltage

0 6 12 18 24 30 36
22, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW Time [h] 8 of 18
Figure 6. The accelerated ageing
Figure 6. The profileageing
accelerated and RTP
profiletest
andfor
RTPdegradation analysis
test for degradation of the
analysis Nissan
of the Leaf
Nissan Leaf
second life battery.
second life battery.

Figure
Figure 7. Nissan Nissan leaf
leaf7. second lifesecond lifevoltage
battery battery voltage variations
variations in various
in various SoCs[22,29–31].
SoCs [22,29–31].
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 9 of 19

Figure 7.
Figure 7. Nissan
Nissan leaf
leaf second
second life
life battery
battery voltage
voltage variations
variations in
in various
various SoCs
SoCs [22,29–31].
[22,29–31].

Figure 8.
Figure 8. Nissan
Nissan leaf8. second
Figure
leaf second lifesecond
Nissan leaf
life battery capacity
lifecapacity
battery fade in
battery capacity
fade in various
fade discharge
in various
various cycles
dischargecycles
discharge [22,29–31].
cycles [22,29–31].
[22,29–31].

Figure 9.
Figure 9. Nissan
Nissan leaf9. second
leaf
Figure second lifesecond
life
Nissan leaf battery
battery voltage
lifevoltage fade in
fade
battery voltagein various
various
fade discharge
discharge
in various cycles
dischargecycles [22,29–31].
[22,29–31].
cycles [22,29–31].

4. Results and Discussions

As the main aim of this study is to assess the impacts of second life battery sizing and
demand variations on the energy performance of the system, a two-way coupling between
the developed second life batteries and solar cells is performed. The operating voltage of
the solar cells will be affected by the variation of second life batteries voltage leading to
their efficiency variations which are considered in this paper. Accordingly, the solar system
modelling is also performed and the impacts of extra load addition and SLB size increase
on solar power generation are presented in Section 4.1. The energy exchange between
the components and battery operational parameters is demonstrated during the day in
Sections 4.2 and 4.3.
12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 18

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 10 of 19

4. Results and Discussions

As the main4.1.aim of this
Impacts study
on Solar is to
Power assess the impacts of second life battery sizing and
Generation
demand variations The on the energy performance
developed mathematical model of the
has system,
been solved a two-way
for 24 h incoupling between
a day (17 January) in
the developed the middle
second of batteries
life winter in Oxford, UK. In
and solar particular,
cells the main reason
is performed. for choosingvoltage
The operating a day at the
of
middle
the solar cells will beofaffected
winter is by
to assess the performance
the variation of the system
of second and ESS when
life batteries the energy
voltage leading input
to
(solar irradiance) is at its minimum values [4]. The solar irradiance is calculated using the
their efficiencymodel
variations
presentedwhich are considered
in Section in the
3.1. In addition, thissimulation
paper. Accordingly, the solar
has considered 3600s as the sys-
time
tem modelling step.
is also performed
Figure 10 showsand the impacts
the aggregation of extra
of solar beamload
and addition and SLB
diffuse radiations size in-
transmitted
crease on solarthrough
powerthe generation
atmosphereare presented
installed in Section
on the tilted plane (PV4.1.panels).
The energy exchange be-
tween the components Figureand11 demonstrates the current parameters
battery operational output of the PVs to the system during
is demonstrated during the the
day
for different scenarios. As mentioned before, a switch, controlled by the batteries’ SoC
day in Sections 4.2 and 4.3.
parameter is adopted to prevent the batteries from overcharging. Therefore, the switch will
break the connection between the PVs and the battery storage system when the batteries
4.1. Impacts on Solar Power Generation
are overcharged. The activation time of the switch can be figured out in Figure 11. For
the base scenario (black
The developed mathematical model line), inhas
which onlysolved
been residential
for building
24 h in ademand
day (17 is applied
January) to the
in
system, the switch is turned to active mode right after reaching the peak current value at
the middle of winter
1 PM. Thein extra
Oxford,
powerUK. In particular,
generated the main
by PVs would not bereason
directedfor choosing
to the a day at
system afterward
the middle of winter
resultingisintoa assess the performance
sharp increase in PV current of flowthe system
through theand ESS
system when
after 1 PM.the
An energy
increase
input (solar irradiance)
of second life isbattery
at its pack
minimum
size by anvalues [4].ofThe
increment solar irradiance
the number of modules from is calculated
2 to 4, when
using the model extra EVCS load
presented in is applied,
Section leads
3.1. to an increased
In addition, PV system current
the simulation flow to the system
has considered 3600s
after reaching peak hours. This is due to an increase in the overcharging limit of the energy
as the time step. Figure 10 shows the aggregation of solar beam and diffuse radiations
storage system and higher amounts of stored energy. Accordingly, the switch activation
transmitted through the atmosphere
time is delayed installed
by an increase on the of
in the number tilted
packs.plane (PV panels).

Figure 10. Solar irradiance (clear-sky

Figure 10. Solar radiation)
irradiance at various
(clear-sky radiation) times during
at various the day
times during on on
the day 17 17
January.
January.

Figure 11 demonstrates the current output of the PVs to the system during the day
for different scenarios. As mentioned before, a switch, controlled by the batteries’ SoC
parameter is adopted to prevent the batteries from overcharging. Therefore, the switch
will break the connection between the PVs and the battery storage system when the bat-
teries are overcharged. The activation time of the switch can be figured out in Figure 11.
For the base scenario (black line), in which only residential building demand is applied to
the system, the switch is turned to active mode right after reaching the peak current value
at 1 PM. The extra power generated by PVs would not be directed to the system afterward
OR PEER REVIEW 10 of 18

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103

the energy storage system and higher amounts of stored energy. Accordingly, the switch11 of 19
activation time is delayed by an increase in the number of packs.

Figure 11. Second life Figure

battery11.SoC forlife
Second different scenarios
battery SoC at various
for different times
scenarios during
at various the
times day.the day.
during

4.2. Impacts on Second Life Battery

4.2. Impacts on Second Life Battery
Figures 12 and 13 show the current and the voltage of the second life battery packs
Figures 12 andduring
13 show a daythe current
under and
different the voltage
scenarios. of the of
The addition second
the EVCS lifeload
battery
demand packs
leads to a
during a day underdecrease
different of the SLBs charging
scenarios. current peak
The addition ofup
the to EVCS
approximately 10% as shown
load demand leadsintoFigure
a 12
due to the increment of the system demand. Furthermore, the peak discharge current is
decrease of the SLBs charging current peak up to approximately 10% as shown in Figure
also increased and when the EVCS load is applied to the system. Figure 12 also reveals
12 due to the increment ofpack
that the the size
system demand.
increment Furthermore,
will extend the charging the peak of
capacity discharge
the ESS as current
the integral of
is also increased andthewhen
chargingthecurrent
EVCScurveloadfor
is the
applied
orangeto theredsystem.
and Figure
lines (3 and 12 also
4 packs) reveals
are higher than the
curve representing the EV-2P scenario. This is due to the activation
that the pack size increment will extend the charging capacity of the ESS as the integral of of the switch reaching
the charging currentthe maximum charge capacity of the batteries. The peak voltage of the second life battery
curve for the orange and red lines (3 and 4 packs) are higher than the
packs decreased with the increase in the number of packs as shown in Figure 13, primarily
curve representing the EV-2P scenario.
due to the increase in theThis
totalis due toofthe
capacity the activation of the aswitch
system and gaining reaching
more stable operational
the maximum charge capacity
voltage. of the
In Figure 13, batteries.
reaching theThe peak voltage
maximum voltage ofof thethe
ESSsecond
is delayed life
bybattery
an increase in
packs decreased with thethe increase
number inpacks.
of SLB the number of packs
The maximum as shown
voltage of the ESSin on
Figure
a full 13, primarily
charge. By increment
of SLB size to 17.55 kWh and 23.4 kWh, in EV-3P and EV-4P
due to the increase in the total capacity of the system and gaining a more stable opera- scenarios, the peak voltages
dropped to 116 V and 111 V, respectively. This is due to an increase in capacity resulting in
tional voltage. In Figure 13, reaching the maximum voltage of the ESS is delayed by an
a decrement in voltage variations of ESS and an extension of the SLB life span.
increase in the number of SLB packs. The maximum voltage of the ESS on a full charge.
By increment of SLB size to 17.55 kWh and 23.4 kWh, in EV-3P and EV-4P scenarios, the
peak voltages dropped to 116 V and 111 V, respectively. This is due to an increase in ca-
pacity resulting in a decrement in voltage variations of ESS and an extension of the SLB
life span.
Figure 14 presents the SoC variations of the second life battery packs in transient
conditions during the day for different scenarios. In particular, the comparison of the base
and EV-2P scenarios (both with two battery packs) indicates that adding extra load de-
mand to the system (EV charging station load) results in a rapid discharge of the battery
packs from 00.00 to 01.00. Furthermore, the second life battery packs in the EV-2P scenario
would be fully charged by approximately 1 h delay compared to the base scenario (which
is fully charged at around 14.00). The final SoC of the battery packs also decreased dra-
matically from 60% (base scenario) to 26% (EV-2P scenario) by adding EVCS load to the
system which could result in a significant mismatch between load and energy generation
 gests that increasing the SLB EES size up to 23.4 kWh would be beneficial in gaining a
stable energy exchange between the components and reducing the energy generation-con-
sumption mismatch in the proposed system. The main drawback of the size increment of
energy storage system would be the increase in its cost, which might be solved by the
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103
employment of SLBs given their relatively lower price when compared with brand new12 of 19
batteries.

Figure 12. Second lifeFigure

battery
12.current forbattery
Second life different scenarios
current during
for different the day.
scenarios during the day.

Figure 13. Second lifeFigure

battery
13.voltage forbattery
Second life different scenarios
voltage in various
for different scenariostimes during
in various timesthe day.the day.
during

Figure 14 presents the SoC variations of the second life battery packs in transient
conditions during the day for different scenarios. In particular, the comparison of the base
and EV-2P scenarios (both with two battery packs) indicates that adding extra load demand
to the system (EV charging station load) results in a rapid discharge of the battery packs
from 00.00 to 01.00. Furthermore, the second life battery packs in the EV-2P scenario would
 Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 13 of 19

be fully charged by approximately 1 h delay compared to the base scenario (which is fully
charged at around 14.00). The final SoC of the battery packs also decreased dramatically
from 60% (base scenario) to 26% (EV-2P scenario) by adding EVCS load to the system which
could result in a significant mismatch between load and energy generation for the next
day. To solve this issue the number of battery packs are increased in scenarios EV-3P and
EV-4P to 3 and 4 packs, by assuming that the number of PVs are constant. According to
Figure 10, by increasing the number of battery packs, the discharging curve between 10.00
to 12.00 is shifted upward by nearly 10%, and the SoC peak has decreased steeply due to
the increased capacity of the ESS. Furthermore, the final SoC has increased by escalating the
number of battery packs to nearly 53% for the EV-4P scenario. This suggests that increasing
the SLB EES size up to 23.4 kWh would be beneficial in gaining a stable energy exchange
between the components and reducing the energy generation-consumption mismatch in
the proposed system. The main drawback of the size increment of energy storage system
OR PEER REVIEW 12 of 18
would be the increase in its cost, which might be solved by the employment of SLBs given
their relatively lower price when compared with brand new batteries.

Figure 14. Second life Figure

battery14.SoC for life
Second different scenarios
battery SoC in various
for different times
scenarios during
in various theduring
times day. the day.
4.3. Energy Exchange Analysis
4.3. Energy Exchange Analysis
In this section, the energy exchange between the main components of the system;
In this section,ESS,
the PVs,
energy exchange
and the between
demand side the mainTable
is demonstrated. components of energy
4 presents the the system;
generated by
the solar system against the demand side’s consumption.
ESS, PVs, and the demand side is demonstrated. Table 4 presents the energy generated byFor the base scenario, in which
the solar system is designed to cover only the residential building demand, a significant
the solar system against the demand side’s consumption. For the base scenario, in which
difference is not observed between energy supply and demand. However, the aggregated
the solar system is designed
demand hastoovercome
cover only the residential
the supply energy valuebuilding
by adding demand,
an extra loada significant
to the solar system.
difference is not observed between
The difference energy
between thesupply and demand.
energy supply and demand However,
needs to the aggregatedby the
be compensated
demand has overcome amount
theofsupply
energy available in the batteries
energy value (the initial
by adding SoC ofload
an extra the batteries equalssys-
to the solar 60% in the
simulations) in this scenario (EV-2P). This must be noted that the simulations are performed
tem. The difference between the energy supply and demand needs to be compensated by
by considering the worst-case scenario; the solar irradiance and residential building energy
the amount of energy available
demand are atintheir
the minimum
batteries and(themaximum
initial SoC of during
rates the batteries
the year,equals 60% The
respectively.
in the simulations) in this scenario
mismatch between (EV-2P). Thisand
energy supply must be noted
demand thattothe
is expected be simulations
minimum in the are
warmer
performed by considering the worst-case scenario; the solar irradiance and residential
building energy demand are at their minimum and maximum rates during the year, re-
spectively. The mismatch between energy supply and demand is expected to be minimum
in the warmer months of the year. Table 4 indicates that increasing the number of second
 Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 14 of 19

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW months of the year. Table 4 indicates that increasing the number of second life batteries
13 of 18
results in minimizing the difference between the energy supply and demand, which could
increase the stability of the proposed energy system. The hourly energy exchange rate
between the system components is shown in Figure 15a–d for different scenarios.
Table 4. Energy generation and demand for different scenarios for the proposed day.
Table 4. Energy generation and demand for different scenarios for the proposed day.
Demand Energy
Parameter Availability of InputAvailability
Energy by PV Panels [kWh/day]
of Input Energy Demand Energy
Parameter [kWh/day]
by PV Panels [kWh/day] [kWh/day]
Base 11.34 10.6
Base 11.34 10.6
EV-2P EV-2P
12.88 12.88 17.2
17.2
EV-3P EV-3P 15.5815.58 17.2 17.2
EV-4P EV-4P 15.62 15.62 17.2 17.2

(a)

(b)

Figure 15. Cont.

Appl. Sci. 2022,
Appl. Sci. 12, x FOR
2022, PEER REVIEW
12, 11103 15 of 14
19 of 18

(c)

(d)
Figure 15.15.
Figure Proposed
Proposedsystem hourlyenergy
system hourly energyexchange
exchange
for for different
different components
components in (a)(b)
in (a) Base, Base, (b) EV-
EV-2P,
2P,(c)
(c)EV-3P
EV-3P and (d) EV-4P scenarios.
and (d) EV-4P scenarios.

4.4. Impacts
Tableof4 ESS’ SoHthe
presents on energy
Stabilitygeneration
of the System
and demand for different scenarios in this
study. By adding extra EVCS load to the system in the EV-2P scenario, while the number
The SoH of the second life batteries would be decreased over time and reduce the
of SLB packs is kept constant (compared to the base scenario), the minimal increase in
total capacity of the ESS system. This could directly affect the off-grid system stability in
PV panel power generation is seen due to variations of their operating voltage affected
terms of energy
by battery exchange
packs between ESS
voltage variations shownandinthe other
Figure 13.components.
An increase in Additionally, the dif-
SLB packs’ size
ference between
to 17.55 the initial
kWh (EV-3P) andcharge
23.4 kWhof the SLBsleads
(EV-4P) and to
their
an state of charge
increase at theenergy
in PV panel end of the
daygeneration
can be used as and
by 21% the indicator of energyresulting
21.27%, respectively, storagefrom
system stability.
an increase If the SoCstorage
in electricity at the end
of the day would
capacity be much
which allows lower
higher ratesthan SoC at
of energy the beginning
storage of the
and lowering day, it suggests
variations that the
of PV panels
operating voltage.
discharging rate of the SLBs is higher than their charging rate. Therefore, the ESS charging
and discharging stability depends on two parameters: storage size and generation rate.
The storage size is increased by the increment of the number of SLB packs; however, it
will be also affected by cycle ageing of the batteries leading to decrement in size withbthe
passing of time (also charging and discharging cycles). In this section, the impacts of SLBs
sizing and cycle ageing on ESS stability are investigated. The difference between the initial
and the final SoC is defined as the primary indicator of system stability in this study,
 Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 16 of 19

4.4. Impacts of ESS’ SoH on Stability of the System

The SoH of the second life batteries would be decreased over time and reduce the
total capacity of the ESS system. This could directly affect the off-grid system stability
in terms of energy exchange between ESS and the other components. Additionally, the
difference between the initial charge of the SLBs and their state of charge at the end of the
day can be used as the indicator of energy storage system stability. If the SoC at the end of
the day would be much lower than SoC at the beginning of the day, it suggests that the
discharging rate of the SLBs is higher than their charging rate. Therefore, the ESS charging
and discharging stability depends on two parameters: storage size and generation rate.
The storage size is increased by the increment of the number of SLB packs; however, it
12, x FOR PEER REVIEW will be also affected by cycle ageing of the batteries leading to decrement15inofsize
18 withbthe
passing of time (also charging and discharging cycles). In this section, the impacts of SLBs
sizing and cycle ageing on ESS stability are investigated. The difference between the initial
and the final SoC is defined as the primary indicator of system stability in this study, which
could be expressed as: 𝑆𝑜𝐶 = 𝑆𝑜𝐶 − 𝑆𝑜𝐶 (9)
SoCD = SoCi − SoC f (9)
where 𝑆𝑜𝐶 , 𝑆𝑜𝐶 , and 𝑆𝑜𝐶 are second life battery SoC difference, initial SoC and final
where SoCD , SoCi , and SoC f are second life battery SoC difference, initial SoC and final
SoC, respectively.
SoC, respectively.
The effects of second life batteries’ ageing on the system stability is illustrated in Fig-
The effects of second life batteries’ ageing on the system stability is illustrated in
ures 16 and 17 forFigures
the scenarios
16 and 17 with extra
for the EVCS loads.
scenarios When
with extra EVCS
EVCS load
loads. is applied,
When EVCS loadtheis applied,
stability of the system could be maintained by increasing the number of battery packs,
the stability of the system could be maintained by increasing the number of battery packs,
due to the reduction
due of SoCreduction
to the difference. Thisdifference.
of SoC translatesThis
to 4translates
battery packs in this
to 4 battery study
packs to study to
in this
hold the system stability
hold the at an acceptable
system stability atlevel before reaching
an acceptable 2000
level before discharge
reaching 2000cycles andcycles and
discharge
approximately 60% approximately
SoH, since the 60%SoC
SoH,difference
since the SoC difference
remains remains
almost almost
constant constant
until until reaching
reaching
these points, as shown
these points, as shown in Figures 16 and 17. in Figures 16 and 17.

Figure 16. The SoC difference in different

Figure 16. The second
SoC difference in life batteries
different discharge
second cycles
life batteries for various
discharge cyclesscenarios.
for various scenarios.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 17 of 19

Figure 16. The SoC difference in different second life batteries discharge cycles for various scenarios.

Figure 17. The

Figure 17. The SoC difference SoC difference
in different in different
second second
life batteries life batteries
SoHs SoHs
for various for various scenarios.
scenarios.

The impacts of battery sizing on the energy flow in a stand-alone PV system equipped
with second life ESS is investigated while the system is designed based on the worst-case
scenario. The results of this study revealed the relation between SLB SoC and SoH which
can be used for programming battery management systems. Since most of the PVs in
residential buildings are connected to the grid, the effects of employment of different SLB
ESS sizes on the energy performance of such a system is not considered which can be
counted as the disadvantage of this study.
The experimental data for Nissan Leaf, collected from the literature, are obtained by
degradation analysis of the SLBs using accelerated ageing profile (charging and discharging
c-rates of 1C) and consequently the ESS model is not validated against the battery empirical
tests at various C-rates. Its impacts, therefore, on the degradation of the batteries is
neglected in this study.

5. Conclusions
In this paper, the battery sizing and technical assessment of an energy system with
a second life energy storage system and an off-grid PV energy system is performed. The
main aim of this paper is to investigate the effects of adding extra EV charging station
load on the ESS performance applied to a residential building. In addition, a parametric
study is performed to assess the SLBs’ size variations in the ESS when an extra load is
applied. The proposed case study residential building is located in Oxford. This paper
has developed a novel methodology for assessing the off-grid PV system stability and
minimizing the energy supply–demand mismatch. The proposed off-grid system with
second life ESS has been mathematically modelled in MATLAB SIMULINK. The system is
simulated considering the worst-case scenario on a day in the middle of winter, when the
solar irradiation and demand are at their minimum and maximum levels, respectively. The
configuration of the second life ESS is accomplished by utilizing Nissan Leaf retired battery
modules with an 80% SoH. The main conclusions drawn from the analysis can be listed as:
• An increase in SLBs size, when an extra EV charging load is applied, leads to a voltage
peak drop in the second life battery. The increase in the number of SLB packs to
4 resulted in a 7.5% voltage peak drop of ESS.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 18 of 19

• Adding EV charging station demand to the off-grid PV driven system, which has been
designed to cover residential building demand (with two second life battery packs),
expectedly resulted in instabilities in energy exchange between different components
of the system during the year. Assuming that there is no extra space left on the building
roof to add PV panels, increasing the number of second life battery packs was explored
with the findings suggesting that an installed capacity equivalent to 4 battery packs
for the studied residential building would minimize the energy mismatch between the
energy supply and demand. This occurs before reaching 2000 discharge cycles and
approximately 60% SoH (the final SoC of the ESS increased to nearly 53% for the case
with 4 battery packs).
• When EVCS load has been applied to the residential load demand, the stability of
the system could be improved by increasing the number of second life batteries due
to the minimal differences in the initial and final SoC of the second life ESS. This is
also beneficial in terms of cost, given that second life batteries have a lower price than
brand new batteries.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.R., D.M., P.H. and A.A.; Formal analysis, F.S.; Funding
acquisition, A.A.; Methodology, S.R., D.M., P.H. and A.A.; Software, F.S.; Supervision, S.R., D.M., P.H.
and A.A.; Validation, F.S.; Writing—original draft, F.S., S.R., D.M. and P.H.; Writing—review and
editing, F.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The related data are presented within the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

EV Electric vehicle
PV Photovoltaic panel
ESS Energy storage system
SoC State of charge
SLB Second life battery
SoH State of health
EVCS Electric vehicle charging station
CS Charging station
ECM equivalent circuit model

References
1. Salek, F.; Eshghi, H.; Zamen, M.; Ahmadi, M.H. Energy and exergy analysis of an atmospheric water generator integrated with
the compound parabolic collector with storage tank in various climates. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 2401–2412. [CrossRef]
2. Cui, C.; Zou, Y.; Wei, L.; Wang, Y. Evaluating combination models of solar irradiance on inclined surfaces and forecasting
photovoltaic power generation. IET Smart Grid 2019, 2, 123–130. [CrossRef]
3. Obeidat, F. A comprehensive review of future photovoltaic systems. Sol. Energy 2018, 163, 545–551. [CrossRef]
4. Mohamed, A.A.R.; Morrow, D.J.; Best, R.J.; Cupples, A.; Bailie, I.; Pollock, J. Distributed battery energy storage systems operation
framework for grid power levelling in the distribution networks. IET Smart Grid 2021, 4, 582–598. [CrossRef]
5. Campana, P.E.; Cioccolanti, L.; François, B.; Jurasz, J.; Zhang, Y.; Varini, M.; Stridh, B.; Yan, J. Li-ion batteries for peak shaving,
price arbitrage, and photovoltaic self-consumption in commercial buildings: A Monte Carlo Analysis. Energy Convers. Manag.
2021, 234, 113889. [CrossRef]
6. Uzair, M.; Rehman, N.U.; Yousuf, M.U. Sensitivity analysis of capital and energy production cost for off-grid building integrated
photovoltaic systems. Renew. Energy 2022, 186, 195–206. [CrossRef]
7. Zand, M.; Nasab, M.A.; Sanjeevikumar, P.; Maroti, P.K.; Holm-Nielsen, J.B. Energy management strategy for solid-state
transformer-based solar charging station for electric vehicles in smart grids. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2020, 14, 3843–3852.
[CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11103 19 of 19

8. Li, C.; Zheng, Y.; Li, Z.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, L.; Shan, Y.; Tang, Q. Techno-economic and environmental evaluation of grid-connected
and off-grid hybrid intermittent power generation systems: A case study of a mild humid subtropical climate zone in China.
Energy 2021, 230, 120728. [CrossRef]
9. Cusenza, M.A.; Guarino, F.; Longo, S.; Mistretta, M.; Cellura, M. Reuse of electric vehicle batteries in buildings: An integrated
load match analysis and life cycle assessment approach. Energy Build. 2019, 186, 339–354. [CrossRef]
10. Costa, C.; Barbosa, J.; Gonçalves, R.; Castro, H.; Del Campo, F.; Lanceros-Méndez, S. Recycling and environmental issues of
lithium-ion batteries: Advances, challenges and opportunities. Energy Storage Mater. 2021, 37, 433–465. [CrossRef]
11. Cusenza, M.A.; Guarino, F.; Longo, S.; Ferraro, M.; Cellura, M. Energy and environmental benefits of circular economy strategies:
The case study of reusing used batteries from electric vehicles. J. Energy Storage 2019, 25, 100845. [CrossRef]
12. Wang, T.; Jiang, Y.; Kang, L.; Liu, Y. Determination of retirement points by using a multi-objective optimization to compromise
the first and second life of electric vehicle batteries. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 123128. [CrossRef]
13. Sun, B.; Su, X.; Wang, D.; Zhang, L.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Liang, H.; Gong, M.; Zhang, W.; Jiang, J. Economic analysis of lithium-ion
batteries recycled from electric vehicles for secondary use in power load peak shaving in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 276, 123327.
[CrossRef]
14. Hart, P.; Kollmeyer, P.; Juang, L.; Lasseter, R.; Jahns, T. (Eds.) Modeling of second-life batteries for use in a CERTS microgrid. In
Proceedings of the 2014 Power and Energy Conference at Illinois (PECI), Champaign, IL, USA, 28 February–1 March 2014.
15. Mathews, I.; Xu, B.; He, W.; Barreto, V.; Buonassisi, T.; Peters, I.M. Technoeconomic model of second-life batteries for utility-scale
solar considering calendar and cycle aging. Appl. Energy 2020, 269, 115127. [CrossRef]
16. Uddin, K.; Gough, R.; Radcliffe, J.; Marco, J.; Jennings, P. Techno-economic analysis of the viability of residential photovoltaic
systems using lithium-ion batteries for energy storage in the United Kingdom. Appl. Energy 2017, 206, 12–21. [CrossRef]
17. Assunção, A.; Moura, P.S.; de Almeida, A.T. Technical and economic assessment of the secondary use of repurposed electric
vehicle batteries in the residential sector to support solar energy. Appl. Energy 2016, 181, 120–131. [CrossRef]
18. Tong, S.J.; Same, A.; Kootstra, M.A.; Park, J.W. Off-grid photovoltaic vehicle charge using second life lithium batteries: An
experimental and numerical investigation. Appl. Energy 2013, 104, 740–750. [CrossRef]
19. Torres-Sanz, V.; Sanguesa, J.A.; Martinez, F.J.; Garrido, P.; Marquez-Barja, J.M. Enhancing the Charging Process of Electric Vehicles
at Residential Homes. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 22875–22888. [CrossRef]
20. Sprake, D.; Vagapov, Y.; Lupin, S.; Anuchin, A. (Eds.) Housing estate energy storage feasibility for a 2050 scenario. In Proceedings
of the 2017 Internet Technologies and Applications (ITA), Guangzhou, China, 26–28 May 2017.
21. Pimm, A.J.; Cockerill, T.T.; Taylor, P.G. The potential for peak shaving on low voltage distribution networks using electricity
storage. J. Energy Storage 2018, 16, 231–242. [CrossRef]
22. Braco, E.; Martín, I.S.; Berrueta, A.; Sanchis, P.; Ursúa, A. Experimental assessment of cycling ageing of lithium-ion second-life
batteries from electric vehicles. J. Energy Storage 2020, 32, 101695. [CrossRef]
23. Available online: https://www.enfsolar.com/pv/panel-datasheet/crystalline/44143 (accessed on 1 September 2022).
24. Duffie, J.A.; Beckman, W.A. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013.
25. Salek, F.; Rahnama, M.; Eshghi, H.; Babaie, M.; Naserian, M.M. Investigation of Solar-Driven Hydroxy gas production system
performance integrated with photovoltaic panels with single-axis tracking system. Renew. Energy Res. Appl. 2022, 3, 31–40.
26. Solar Cell. Available online: https://uk.mathworks.com/help/physmod/sps/ref/solarcell.html;jsessionid=bdf3b2865e01ab9c5
896c9e033dc (accessed on 1 August 2022).
27. He, H.; Xiong, R.; Fan, J. Evaluation of Lithium-Ion Battery Equivalent Circuit Models for State of Charge Estimation by an
Experimental Approach. Energies 2011, 4, 582–598. [CrossRef]
28. Nejad, S.; Gladwin, D.; Stone, D. A systematic review of lumped-parameter equivalent circuit models for real-time estimation of
lithium-ion battery states. J. Power Sources 2016, 316, 183–196. [CrossRef]
29. Braco, E.; San Martín, I.; Sanchis, P.; Ursúa, A. (Eds.) Characterization and capacity dispersion of lithium-ion second-life batteries
from electric vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering and
2019 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC/I&CPS Europe), Genova, Italy, 11–14 July 2019.
30. Braco, E.; San Martin, I.; Ursúa, A.; Sanchis, P. (Eds.) Incremental capacity analysis of lithium-ion second-life batteries from
electric vehicles under cycling ageing. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electri-
cal Engineering and 2021 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC/I&CPS Europe), Bari, Italy, 7–10
September 2021.
31. Braco, E.; San Martin, I.; Berrueta, A.; Sanchis, P.; Ursua, A. Experimental Assessment of First-and Second-Life Electric Vehicle
Batteries: Performance, Capacity Dispersion and Aging. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2021, 57, 4107–4117. [CrossRef]