Electric Car Sharing as an Integrated Part of Public Transport: Customers’ Needs and Experience

  • Steffi KramerEmail author
  • Christian Hoffmann
  • Tobias Kuttler
  • Manuel Hendzlik
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mobility book series (LNMOB)


The project BeMobility/Berlin elektroMobil aims to investigate the benefits and draw backs of electric vehicles as part of the public transport system. Therefore, about 40 electric vehicles (EV) were integrated into a public car sharing system in Berlin and research was conducted measuring users acceptance of this service. By utilising online surveys this service was tested for user friendliness, everyday usability and its modal integration. The study revealed unique user groups whose travel patterns are multimodal and dominated by public transport. These sample groups can be characterised as environmentally friendly and open-minded towards car sharing and mobility concepts in general. Positive expectations and experience with EVs are related to quality and pleasure of driving whilst aspects of charging and costs are considered in a critical way. In order to cater for everyday mobility an integration of electric car sharing into Berlin‘s public transport system is perceived as sensible. This will provide the opportunity to compensating for limitations of electric vehicles.


Public Transport Electric Vehicle Modal Choice Travel Behavior Electric Mobility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Brake M (2009) Mobilität im regenerativen Zeitalter: Was bewegt uns nach dem Öl? Hannover, HeiseGoogle Scholar
  2. BMU (2011) Umweltbewusstsein in Deutschland 2008. Resource document. Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit. Accessed 21 June 2011
  3. Canzler W, Knie A (2011) Einfach aufladen: Mit Elektromobilität in eine saubere Zukunft. München, OekomGoogle Scholar
  4. Golob T, Gould J (1998) Projecting use of electric vehicles from household vehicle trials. Trans Res Part B 32(7):441–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Infas DLR (2010) Mobilität in Deutschland 2008. Resource document. Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. Bonn und Berlin. Accessed 11 June 2011
  6. Intermodi (2004) Sicherung der Anschluss- und Zugangsmobilität durch neue Angebotsbausteine im Rahmen der “Forschungsinitiative Schiene”. Gemeinsamer Schlussbericht von DB Rent und WZB. 6/2005Google Scholar
  7. Krems J et al (2010) Research methods to assess the acceptance of EVs—experiences from an EV user study. In: Gessner (ed) Smart systems integration: 4th european conference and exhibition on integration issues of miniaturized systems—MEMS, MOEMS, ICs and electronic components. VDE Verlag, Como, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  8. Maertins C, Hoffmann C, Knie A (2004) Automobil mit der Bahn. Internationales Verkehrswesen 56(1+2):38–40Google Scholar
  9. NOW (2011) National Organisation Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology. Accessed 3 Aug 2011
  10. Scherf C, Wolter F (2011) Multimodales Mobilitätsmanagement. Internationales Verkehrswesen 63(1):53–57Google Scholar
  11. Sperling D, Gordon D (2009) Two billion cars. Driving toward sustainability. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Turrentine T et al (2011) The UC Davis MINI E consumer study. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies Research Report 5Google Scholar
  13. Wolter F, Hasse S, Heinicke B (2011) Intelligent vernetzen. Internationales Verkehrswesen 63(5):16–19Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steffi Kramer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christian Hoffmann
    • 1
  • Tobias Kuttler
    • 1
  • Manuel Hendzlik
    • 1
  1. 1.InnoZ—Innovationszentrum f. Mobilität u. gesellschaftlichen Wandel GmbHBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations