Big Rig Fuel Economy Goes Global

Bonjour everyone!  Don Anair (a.k.a. “Sharkey”) here, back from a long blog break.

With Congress debating fuel economy standard improvements for passenger vehicles, it seems an appropriate time to look at other modes of transportation that use billions of gallons of oil annually and contribute significantly to global warming.  How about freight trucking?  This is a sector that has no existing fuel economy standards but could benefit significantly from fuel efficiency improvements given the tens of thousands of miles each truck travels every year.  Encouragingly, the energy bill adopted in the Senate not only calls for improving passenger vehicle fuel economy to 35 mpg, but calls for the development of fuel economy test procedures for medium and heavy-duty trucks and opens the door for fuel economy regulations down the road.

I recently attended the Heavy-Duty Fuel Efficiency workshop in Paris, where the topic of discussion was fuel economy regulations for commercial trucks. Policy makers, manufacturers, operators, academics, regulators, and NGOs from around the globe including Europe, the U.S., India, Japan, and others came together to discuss the potential of technologies and policies to improve big rig fuel economy.  A premise for the discussion was posed– “Is it true that sensitivity to fuel price is so strong in the commercial trucking sector, that policies to improve truck efficiency are unnecessary.”  Japan has already decided that the question to this answer is no–and passed the world’s first heavy-duty fuel economy standards in 2006.   

Here are some of the key observations I had from this conference:

• Big rig fuel economy is already moving forward, unlike cars. Fuel economy of heavy-duty vehicles in the U.S. has improved historically about 1 percent per year over the last couple of decades.  This trend–as opposed to stagnant fuel economy in the passenger vehicle market–provides evidence that fuel costs do in fact lead to some improvement in truck fuel efficiency.  The big question is, should it be more?
• Can heavy duty handle bigger fuel economy bang for bigger bucks?  In general, fuel efficiency technology gets integrated into trucks when the fuel savings over 2 to 3 years pay for the increased cost of the technology.  So what about more expensive, yet more efficient technologies with a 5 to 10 year payback, such as hydraulic hybrid systems?  Given that heavy-duty trucks operate for 20 years or more, it seems that these technologies with longer payback periods would also be cost effective, in fact perhaps more so than in the passenger vehicle sector.  One possible explanation could be that trucking companies tend to unload their trucks after about 5 years–and purchase newer ones that come with lower maintenance costs and potentially better fuel efficiency.   So while fuel economy improvements will save fuel costs over the life of the truck, the only ones that matter to the original owner are the ones in the first few years. 
• Some fuel-saving technologies still being “skirted” by truckers.  Turns out even if technologies pay for themselves in fuel savings, they are not always adopted.  Take side skirts on trailers for instance.  EPA estimates that a typical long haul truck could save more than $2,000 per year by installing aerodynamic fairings on to trailers which improve fuel efficiency by 5 percent.  The fairings (or side skirts) cost $2400, yet only a very small fraction of trailers has these installed.  Where is the market failure?  Perhaps it’s because trailer manufacturers don’t make the tractors and vice versa.  Also, one tractor may haul many different trailers over its useful life, so a trucker won’t make the investment to improve a single trailer.  The side skirts might impair ability to inspect the underside of the trailer or might cover the wheels requiring different inspection practices.  For whatever reason, these fuel-saving technologies are not being rapidly adopted. However, if all trailers came off the assembly line equipped with this technology, truckers would keep more money in their pocket instead of burning it up on fuel.
• Knowledge is power.  Access to information is another critically important component in making fuel-efficient truck purchasing decisions.  As a car buyer, I can go to a show room and look at a label posted on a window to find out what the estimated fuel economy of the vehicle is (or go online at www.fueleconomy.gov).  I can then go to the dealership across the street and make a comparison.   Big rigs are a whole other story.  There’s no fuel economy testing or labeling requirements for heavy-duty trucks (or even the Hummer H2 for that matter) to help me decide which truck gets better fuel economy.  The same goes for purchasing tires–which truckers may do multiple times in a year.  The rolling resistance of tires can have a significant effect on fuel economy, but most tires are not labeled. 
• Style is substance.  Keeping tires inflated, of course, is important and raises another aspect of fuel economy improvements.  Just like for passenger cars, maintenance, driving style, and speed can impact fuel economy.  The effect of driving technique is amplified when you’ve got 80,000 pounds behind you.  Driver education and training is an important part for improving fuel economy for trucks.
• It’s not just about what’s under the hood, but what’s in the cargo hold.  Think about the packaging of the goods we buy.  If we reduce packing materials, we could fit more products into a truck, and reduce the demand for truck trips.  Minimizing empty loads can also improve overall efficiency.

While there has been some improvement in fuel economy, it seems to me that there are plenty of improvements to be made to freight trucking efficiency and fuel economy standards is a good place to start.

Posted by: Sharkey

Comments

[LochDhu]

Or better yet, put the long haul freight on trains. I shouldn't risk my life and limb on the tollway when that freight could be on rails. Our rail lines should have as many tracks as we have lanes on the hiways. That would leave enough room for lots of freight and a high-speed Amtrack passenger train wouldn't be held up by a slow freight train.

[Dandy]

GasDandy is an easy-to-use tool that tracks a vehicle’s mileage and maintenance information, providing data that can be used for both business and personal purposes. By making these figures readily available, the program also gives the consumer the opportunity to save money and to proactively identify problems that can shorten the life of their vehicle(s). Download a free trial version of GasDandy today at http://www.gasdandy.com

[LatteLiberal]

Liberals want fuel economy because they are against Christianity. How? Because the more oil we use the quicker we will reach Armageddon. When we run out and the world's nations kill eachother for resources, we will die, sure, but we will go to HEAVEN. In fact, we are alread dead. Think about it. This is a dead earth. There is no God here. But there is in heaven. So being born again and dying again is not impossible. And liberals know this! But they do not want to face the fact that they have a responsibiliy to follow in God's footsteps for a better life. So they choose to kick and scream and slow down Armageddon. But they can't actually STOP it. It is very painful to live a "life" without God on this earth.