7 ms·

> electricity prices per mile of transport per ton were about 25% that of fossil fuel prices per mile of transport per ton In shipping and logistics, time is

> electricity prices per mile of transport per ton were about 25% that of fossil fuel prices per mile of transport per ton In shipping and logistics, time is money. Fuel can be dispensed in the US at a maximum of 10 gal/minute. Factor that against the largest charger you can find and see why the single cost difference doesn't matter yet. > They should really move all long-haul trucking to electric as well Reduced capacity from doing this requires additional vehicle time to haul the same amount of material. This isn't a single factor equation. Plus, over the road drivers sleep in their vehicles, and not always at truck stops. They're only allowed to drive for 10 hours, so it's not always as convenient as you might expect. Consider the weight of 600 gallons of fuel vs. the reduced hauling capacity from using an electric truck and see why we're a ways away from this yet. Have no fear; though, the moment this is logistically favorable, they will switch.

bobthepanda 4y ago
The economics of long haul trucking make electrification hard. Fortunately, for local deliveries like the post office, constant stop-and-go means that regen braking can really stretch the range of electric batteries.
- mulmen 4y ago
  Regen braking plus zero-cost idle. Electric is at a clear advantage for local delivery.
  - jjeaff 4y ago
    Most gas delivery vehicles don't idle these days. But maybe the starter motor requires more maintenance.
    - euroderf 4y ago
      Doesn't every gas motor start spew out some uncombusted fuel ?
      - mulmen 4y ago
        Maybe? I think direct injection motors are actually pretty good at reducing that. Catalytic converters help too. But yeah, there’s more waste than an electric motor. The reassuring thing to me is that in just over 100 years we made the ICE so efficient. It’s a fundamentally wasteful design and we have taken it very, very far. With another 100 years of battery and electric motor development we will have equally impressive capabilities with the added trick of energy source agnosticism.
        jabl 4y ago
        When the engine is warmed up starting it doesn't AFAIU cause any big pulse of pollution. Also vehicles equipped with these stop-start systems AFAIK have more powerful starters so they can start faster.
      - crote 4y ago
        There is a little bit of waste associated with engine start, but it is worth it if you are idling for more than +- 10 seconds.
    - theshrike79 4y ago
      Wait, "most" (over 50%) long-haul trucks and vans have start-stop functionality?
      - 7speter 4y ago
        Am I missing something? This whole thread has been about delivery trucks not long-haul trucks.
      - jjeaff 4y ago
        I think we are all just talking about start and stop delivery trucks. I know the UPS vehicles as well as the USPS vehicles in my area all stop running the engine when they stop and get out.
- hackernewds 4y ago
  This is an assumption without the hard realities to back it.
- AtlasBarfed 4y ago
  Plus they aren't driving at high speed between suburban and city houses, plus they aren't actually driving that far (probably 50-100 miles in suburbs, less than 50 in city) so they don't need a huge battery. They don't need 0-60 in 4 seconds, so a single axle motor is probably all you need. You don't need NMC chemistry for the range, you can just use LFP or sodium ion when it reaches mass production later this year hopefully. You can even use a range extender ICE for the rural models like the BMW i3.
p1necone 4y ago
> In shipping and logistics, time is money. Fuel can be dispensed in the US at a maximum of 10 gal/minute. Factor that against the largest charger you can find and see why the single cost difference doesn't matter yet. If the time wasted charging/refueling is super valuable you can fix this by provisioning a few more vehicles than there are drivers, or having hot swappable pre-charged batteries and provisioning a few more of those than there are vehicles. Then your recharging/refueling time drops down to a couple of minutes max because you're either swapping batteries out or hopping in a different truck.
- mulmen 4y ago
  Over-provisioning vehicles has a capital penalty and requires staging areas that don’t already exist.
  - p1necone 4y ago
    All of this has a capital penalty and requires stuff that doesn't exist yet. We're discussing exactly what stuff might be worth said capital penalty. If the basic running costs of these are really 25% of ICE vehicles then there's a lot of wiggle room for some extra "capital penalty" while still saving a tonne of money.
    - mulmen 4y ago
      I’m not convinced EVs have a capital penalty over ICE. If an operator already has a truck they aren’t going to be in the market for a replacement, EV or not, until it reaches EOL. The lower cost of operation may move the needle on when ICE trucks reach EOL but not by much. How does an owner-operator justify the cost of buying two trucks and staging them? Even for larger operations how do they justify buying trucks that will sit still? Once EVs can meet the hours per day limits they will be appealing without additional infrastructure or over-provisioning.
      - nonethewiser 4y ago
        he’s suggesting using more trucks to counter the lower range. That’s the capital penalty
rootusrootus 4y ago
Sure, a long haul semi with multiple drivers is a use case that won't be filled by electric trucks anytime soon. But that's a fairly narrow niche. Even on long haul routes it's pretty normal for trucks to have only one driver and stop for several hours for a rest. With a megawatt charger and 500 miles of range on a charge, even long haul trucking is just a mild engineering problem. For in town trucks the math works out very well, and very quickly. Which explains why there are already multiple entrants into that market niche.
- coderenegade 4y ago
  A megawatt charger might not be cheaper than fuel. It's a lot of power to dispatch. It'll also still take longer to recharge at that rate than it does to refuel.
  - elihu 4y ago
    On the other hand, megawatt chargers might get cheaper rates because they're buying in bulk, and it's (generally) easier for power companies to provide service to one big customer than a hundred or a thousand little customers. (That's assuming the infrastructure in the area can accommodate it. I expect any heavily-used truck charging stations are going to be located where the utility hookups are comparatively cheap and easy.)
ulfw 4y ago
I've never seen mail being delivered at night, in any country I lived in. Plenty of time to recharge vehicles. If anything, local delivery vehicles are the best thing for EVs as they're inherently daytime use only.
- mulmen 4y ago
  Where I live I definitely see mail delivery after dark but not over night.
photochemsyn 4y ago
Implementing a battery-swap system at major truck stops seems plausible. The semi would pull in, its battery pack would be pulled out by a light crane and slotted into a charging unit, and a fresh pack would be installed, no stop-over time needed. I also wonder whether semis on certain well-defined long-haul routes (I-80 etc) could be partially automated, such that the driver could sleep in the back of the cab much of the time. Not sure if the technology is really there yet, though.
- p1necone 4y ago
  > I also wonder whether semis on certain well-defined long-haul routes (I-80 etc) could be partially automated, such that the driver could sleep in the back of the cab much of the time. Not sure if the technology is really there yet, though. Sure, it's called a train.
  - euroderf 4y ago
    Maybe combined with autonomous electric forklifts to shuttle cargo to/from a waystation.
    - crote 4y ago
      Forklifts?! No, you either use intermodal containers, or just put the entire trailer onto the train.
      - euroderf 4y ago
        Sure containers are the standard... except for the last mile for non-industrial, which is a lot of stuff.
        anticensor 4y ago
        Even at that last mile, you could use trams that take NATO bicons. 80 tonnes per 40ft container, which divides into four equal 20-tonne bicons.
nicholsonpk 4y ago
According to the USPS, "The longest rural delivery route is in Clarinda, IA. The carrier travels 181.4 miles daily and delivers to 234 boxes." It seems like most electric vehicles should have no problem covering that in a single trip and I assume this was something they tested before ordering.
- 7speter 4y ago
  Yeah, hopefully they tested range for the coldest days in winter in that region as well, considering an aerodynamically optimized tesla gets 200 mile range in optimal weather conditions (i.e. sunny day in Los Angeles/the bay area)
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 4y ago
    They do not need the trucks to work in the most extreme cold and rural routes. A lot of low hanging fruit in electrifying easy targets: urban delivery in warmer climates. For instance, a delivery truck in LA might only ever go tens of miles per day and never see cold weather. At the scale of USPS, this could bee hundreds of thousands of trucks.
    - 7speter 4y ago
      The comment im replying to literally says that theres a route in iowa with a distance is 181 miles. I dont understand why theres so much gaslighting in this whole comment thread.
gwbas1c 4y ago
> In shipping and logistics, time is money. Fuel can be dispensed in the US at a maximum of 10 gal/minute. Factor that against the largest charger you can find and see why the single cost difference doesn't matter yet. You charge the mail trucks overnight, when they aren't being driven. I don't know about you, but I've never seen a postman out in the evening or nighttime. I also don't know about you, but I don't stand next to my car when I charge it at a rapid charger. (I stop where I can run an errand or use the bathroom.) In comparison, it takes time to get gas. You have to go out of your way to get to the gas station, go up to the pump, pay for it, and then get back on your way. It always takes me 5-10 minutes to get gas. So, time being money, what makes the most sense is to install a charger at every parking space that a mail truck occupies overnight, and getting rid of the trips to the gas station. The time it takes to plug the car in is negligible.
- frosted-flakes 4y ago
  No one is claiming electrification isn't practical for mail delivery vans. The grandparent comments are discussing long-haul trucking.
  - hackernewds 4y ago
    This a post about USPS delivering? Grandparent comments are off topic
    - redundantly 4y ago
      USPS also does long haul.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - vonmoltke 4y ago
dools 4y ago
This tech is really promising, they can retrofit a battery that can be swapped out for a fully charged one in minutes: https://www.januselectric.com.au https://www.januselectric.com.au
elihu 4y ago
> Have no fear; though, the moment this is logistically favorable, they will switch. I think the thing that makes this logistically favorable is electrification of major highways. What I worry about is that this requires coordination between government agencies and car and truck manufacturers and it requires political will to make it happen and find the funding. We could start building it right now, or we could sit on our thumbs for the next twenty years. (There are several different ways to electrify highways. My preference would be to use something like the system they're testing out in Sweden that uses power rails in slots embedded in the road surface. Cars/trucks have a device that swings down and makes contact. Overhead lines are cheaper, but aren't practical for cars to use. Induction charging is another option but it's much more expensive and power delivery isn't great if there's no physical connection.)
jillesvangurp 4y ago
Fuel is money as well. Recent diesel price inflation caused a lot of misery for truckers. A full tank of fuel costs way more than a typical trucker earns per day. And most truckers own their trucks and are under heavy debt. 600 gallons is a lot for a truck. Depending on where you get your diesel, you are going to pay 2-3 dollars per gallon at least. Closer to 5 in some places. So even a "modest" 150 gallon tank could set you back close to a 800$. Recent price fluctuations due to the rise in oil prices have hit that sector really hard. How many truckers will answer the question "would you like to save more in fuel cost per day than you currently earn per day?" with a "no?. Time loss for charging is maybe inconvenient but the price tag isn't that high for everyone. Anyway, this stops being optional pretty soon after electrical trucks start undercutting transport prices because they simply have lower cost of course. But while there is still a choice, there are going to be smart truckers and broke truckers. They'll pay the difference out of their own pocket. In any case, if the vehicle charges at night and has enough charge for the route, there is no time loss. We're talking mail delivery here not trucking. They are not doing hundreds of miles per day. More like tens. With lots of drive a little, idle, drive a little, etc. driving. This has very poor fuel economy with an ice vehicle. An EV essentially has no energy cost when it is idling. At best you lose some energy to keep the AC and the radio going. Which isn't free with an ice vehicle either. Mail and package deliveries are an ideal use case for EVs. Most commercial delivery companies have largely completed their move to EVs for this reason and are rolling out EVs as fast as they can get their hands on them. That debate is over and there never was much of a debate beyond "Would you like to cut cost? Yes!". Ancient history, the industry has moved on and the answer was conclusive. If you want to compete in that sector, EV is the only way. There's no case left for ice vehicles in that sector. Trucking will follow.

bobthepanda 4y ago

The economics of long haul trucking make electrification hard. Fortunately, for local deliveries like the post office, constant stop-and-go means that regen braking can really stretch the range of electric batteries.

mulmen 4y ago
Regen braking plus zero-cost idle. Electric is at a clear advantage for local delivery.
- jjeaff 4y ago
  Most gas delivery vehicles don't idle these days. But maybe the starter motor requires more maintenance.
  - euroderf 4y ago
    Doesn't every gas motor start spew out some uncombusted fuel ?
    - mulmen 4y ago
      Maybe? I think direct injection motors are actually pretty good at reducing that. Catalytic converters help too. But yeah, there’s more waste than an electric motor. The reassuring thing to me is that in just over 100 years we made the ICE so efficient. It’s a fundamentally wasteful design and we have taken it very, very far. With another 100 years of battery and electric motor development we will have equally impressive capabilities with the added trick of energy source agnosticism.
      - jabl 4y ago
        When the engine is warmed up starting it doesn't AFAIU cause any big pulse of pollution. Also vehicles equipped with these stop-start systems AFAIK have more powerful starters so they can start faster.
    - crote 4y ago
      There is a little bit of waste associated with engine start, but it is worth it if you are idling for more than +- 10 seconds.
  - theshrike79 4y ago
    Wait, "most" (over 50%) long-haul trucks and vans have start-stop functionality?
    - 7speter 4y ago
      Am I missing something? This whole thread has been about delivery trucks not long-haul trucks.
    - jjeaff 4y ago
      I think we are all just talking about start and stop delivery trucks. I know the UPS vehicles as well as the USPS vehicles in my area all stop running the engine when they stop and get out.
hackernewds 4y ago
This is an assumption without the hard realities to back it.
AtlasBarfed 4y ago
Plus they aren't driving at high speed between suburban and city houses, plus they aren't actually driving that far (probably 50-100 miles in suburbs, less than 50 in city) so they don't need a huge battery. They don't need 0-60 in 4 seconds, so a single axle motor is probably all you need. You don't need NMC chemistry for the range, you can just use LFP or sodium ion when it reaches mass production later this year hopefully. You can even use a range extender ICE for the rural models like the BMW i3.

p1necone 4y ago

> In shipping and logistics, time is money. Fuel can be dispensed in the US at a maximum of 10 gal/minute. Factor that against the largest charger you can find and see why the single cost difference doesn't matter yet. If the time wasted charging/refueling is super valuable you can fix this by provisioning a few more vehicles than there are drivers, or having hot swappable pre-charged batteries and provisioning a few more of those than there are vehicles. Then your recharging/refueling time drops down to a couple of minutes max because you're either swapping batteries out or hopping in a different truck.

mulmen 4y ago
Over-provisioning vehicles has a capital penalty and requires staging areas that don’t already exist.
- p1necone 4y ago
  All of this has a capital penalty and requires stuff that doesn't exist yet. We're discussing exactly what stuff might be worth said capital penalty. If the basic running costs of these are really 25% of ICE vehicles then there's a lot of wiggle room for some extra "capital penalty" while still saving a tonne of money.
  - mulmen 4y ago
    I’m not convinced EVs have a capital penalty over ICE. If an operator already has a truck they aren’t going to be in the market for a replacement, EV or not, until it reaches EOL. The lower cost of operation may move the needle on when ICE trucks reach EOL but not by much. How does an owner-operator justify the cost of buying two trucks and staging them? Even for larger operations how do they justify buying trucks that will sit still? Once EVs can meet the hours per day limits they will be appealing without additional infrastructure or over-provisioning.
    - nonethewiser 4y ago
      he’s suggesting using more trucks to counter the lower range. That’s the capital penalty

rootusrootus 4y ago

Sure, a long haul semi with multiple drivers is a use case that won't be filled by electric trucks anytime soon. But that's a fairly narrow niche. Even on long haul routes it's pretty normal for trucks to have only one driver and stop for several hours for a rest. With a megawatt charger and 500 miles of range on a charge, even long haul trucking is just a mild engineering problem. For in town trucks the math works out very well, and very quickly. Which explains why there are already multiple entrants into that market niche.

coderenegade 4y ago
A megawatt charger might not be cheaper than fuel. It's a lot of power to dispatch. It'll also still take longer to recharge at that rate than it does to refuel.
- elihu 4y ago
  On the other hand, megawatt chargers might get cheaper rates because they're buying in bulk, and it's (generally) easier for power companies to provide service to one big customer than a hundred or a thousand little customers. (That's assuming the infrastructure in the area can accommodate it. I expect any heavily-used truck charging stations are going to be located where the utility hookups are comparatively cheap and easy.)

ulfw 4y ago

I've never seen mail being delivered at night, in any country I lived in. Plenty of time to recharge vehicles. If anything, local delivery vehicles are the best thing for EVs as they're inherently daytime use only.

mulmen 4y ago
Where I live I definitely see mail delivery after dark but not over night.

photochemsyn 4y ago

Implementing a battery-swap system at major truck stops seems plausible. The semi would pull in, its battery pack would be pulled out by a light crane and slotted into a charging unit, and a fresh pack would be installed, no stop-over time needed. I also wonder whether semis on certain well-defined long-haul routes (I-80 etc) could be partially automated, such that the driver could sleep in the back of the cab much of the time. Not sure if the technology is really there yet, though.

p1necone 4y ago
> I also wonder whether semis on certain well-defined long-haul routes (I-80 etc) could be partially automated, such that the driver could sleep in the back of the cab much of the time. Not sure if the technology is really there yet, though. Sure, it's called a train.
- euroderf 4y ago
  Maybe combined with autonomous electric forklifts to shuttle cargo to/from a waystation.
  - crote 4y ago
    Forklifts?! No, you either use intermodal containers, or just put the entire trailer onto the train.
    - euroderf 4y ago
      Sure containers are the standard... except for the last mile for non-industrial, which is a lot of stuff.
      - anticensor 4y ago
        Even at that last mile, you could use trams that take NATO bicons. 80 tonnes per 40ft container, which divides into four equal 20-tonne bicons.

nicholsonpk 4y ago

According to the USPS, "The longest rural delivery route is in Clarinda, IA. The carrier travels 181.4 miles daily and delivers to 234 boxes." It seems like most electric vehicles should have no problem covering that in a single trip and I assume this was something they tested before ordering.

7speter 4y ago
Yeah, hopefully they tested range for the coldest days in winter in that region as well, considering an aerodynamically optimized tesla gets 200 mile range in optimal weather conditions (i.e. sunny day in Los Angeles/the bay area)
- 0cf8612b2e1e 4y ago
  They do not need the trucks to work in the most extreme cold and rural routes. A lot of low hanging fruit in electrifying easy targets: urban delivery in warmer climates. For instance, a delivery truck in LA might only ever go tens of miles per day and never see cold weather. At the scale of USPS, this could bee hundreds of thousands of trucks.
  - 7speter 4y ago
    The comment im replying to literally says that theres a route in iowa with a distance is 181 miles. I dont understand why theres so much gaslighting in this whole comment thread.

gwbas1c 4y ago

> In shipping and logistics, time is money. Fuel can be dispensed in the US at a maximum of 10 gal/minute. Factor that against the largest charger you can find and see why the single cost difference doesn't matter yet. You charge the mail trucks overnight, when they aren't being driven. I don't know about you, but I've never seen a postman out in the evening or nighttime. I also don't know about you, but I don't stand next to my car when I charge it at a rapid charger. (I stop where I can run an errand or use the bathroom.) In comparison, it takes time to get gas. You have to go out of your way to get to the gas station, go up to the pump, pay for it, and then get back on your way. It always takes me 5-10 minutes to get gas. So, time being money, what makes the most sense is to install a charger at every parking space that a mail truck occupies overnight, and getting rid of the trips to the gas station. The time it takes to plug the car in is negligible.

frosted-flakes 4y ago
No one is claiming electrification isn't practical for mail delivery vans. The grandparent comments are discussing long-haul trucking.
- hackernewds 4y ago
  This a post about USPS delivering? Grandparent comments are off topic
  - redundantly 4y ago
    USPS also does long haul.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - vonmoltke 4y ago

dools 4y ago

This tech is really promising, they can retrofit a battery that can be swapped out for a fully charged one in minutes: https://www.januselectric.com.au https://www.januselectric.com.au

elihu 4y ago

> Have no fear; though, the moment this is logistically favorable, they will switch. I think the thing that makes this logistically favorable is electrification of major highways. What I worry about is that this requires coordination between government agencies and car and truck manufacturers and it requires political will to make it happen and find the funding. We could start building it right now, or we could sit on our thumbs for the next twenty years. (There are several different ways to electrify highways. My preference would be to use something like the system they're testing out in Sweden that uses power rails in slots embedded in the road surface. Cars/trucks have a device that swings down and makes contact. Overhead lines are cheaper, but aren't practical for cars to use. Induction charging is another option but it's much more expensive and power delivery isn't great if there's no physical connection.)

jillesvangurp 4y ago

Fuel is money as well. Recent diesel price inflation caused a lot of misery for truckers. A full tank of fuel costs way more than a typical trucker earns per day. And most truckers own their trucks and are under heavy debt. 600 gallons is a lot for a truck. Depending on where you get your diesel, you are going to pay 2-3 dollars per gallon at least. Closer to 5 in some places. So even a "modest" 150 gallon tank could set you back close to a 800$. Recent price fluctuations due to the rise in oil prices have hit that sector really hard. How many truckers will answer the question "would you like to save more in fuel cost per day than you currently earn per day?" with a "no?. Time loss for charging is maybe inconvenient but the price tag isn't that high for everyone. Anyway, this stops being optional pretty soon after electrical trucks start undercutting transport prices because they simply have lower cost of course. But while there is still a choice, there are going to be smart truckers and broke truckers. They'll pay the difference out of their own pocket. In any case, if the vehicle charges at night and has enough charge for the route, there is no time loss. We're talking mail delivery here not trucking. They are not doing hundreds of miles per day. More like tens. With lots of drive a little, idle, drive a little, etc. driving. This has very poor fuel economy with an ice vehicle. An EV essentially has no energy cost when it is idling. At best you lose some energy to keep the AC and the radio going. Which isn't free with an ice vehicle either. Mail and package deliveries are an ideal use case for EVs. Most commercial delivery companies have largely completed their move to EVs for this reason and are rolling out EVs as fast as they can get their hands on them. That debate is over and there never was much of a debate beyond "Would you like to cut cost? Yes!". Ancient history, the industry has moved on and the answer was conclusive. If you want to compete in that sector, EV is the only way. There's no case left for ice vehicles in that sector. Trucking will follow.