3 ms·
Between all the people looking at a problem you'll probably get every possible solution and one (or more) of them could be correct. Hindsight reinforces that op
by buran77 6y ago
Between all the people looking at a problem you'll probably get every possible solution and one (or more) of them could be correct. Hindsight reinforces that opinion and makes it look more certain than it was at the time. But would you have bet the farm for your assumption then? It's easy to "see the future" when you have no risks to consider.
- salmo 6y agoAlso, I think that view only looks at the vehicle itself and neglects the onerous funding model the USPS is saddled with and the investment required on the supply chain/logistics side. The fleet itself is a massive capital investment. But changing the fuel would be sizable as well. The USPS already has a supply chain network and facilities for gasoline. Replacing that will be huge in itself. Municipalities are a better first-step and have had some success with moving bus fleets and maintenance vehicles to NG or EV. But they usually just have a handful of fueling stations and suppliers. Fleet renewal is a pretty well understood budgeting process in any large scale logistics network (airlines, military, delivery..). You reach a point where replacing the fleet is a better investment than maintaining the current one. To migrate to EVs, the USPS would likely wait out success in the private sector (like FedEx’s announcement) to demonstrate ROI, and retrofit this design or phase in a 2nd or 3rd iteration on it as a separate budget/RFP process.