Week 9: Project Finalization and Draft Revision

This week was largely split between finalizing my work and submitting the first full draft of my paper to my advisor for review, followed by responding to his revisions with specific changes. Having worked on both the technical and writing sides of my project for several weeks now, this week was when everything came together as one finalized document. The introduction, literature review, methods, results, and conclusion were all reviewed and refined before I submitted the draft to my senior project advisor.

My advisor had two main critiques in response. The first pertained to how the tool only uses two measures (existing coverage and population density) and how there could be more nuance on the equity and demand sides of the analysis, especially considering that EV cost barriers may pose a larger limitation than lack of infrastructure in lower-income neighborhoods. The second critique was that the density of chargers in downtown DC isn’t only an issue of wealth inequality, that charging stations cluster near workplaces for the convenience of commuters with EVs. I took his feedback and clarified the paper language to note that the tool was meant to be a prioritization framework rather than a definite siting tool and that the output was meant to be further analyzed by planners with their city’s context in mind. Additionally, it serves as a proof-of-concept for the efficacy of a lightweight, open-architecture tool. I also rearranged the literature review into two paragraphs and included an inline definition of “greedy algorithms” to increase readability.