yet another school project from a terribly uninformed and unknowing student

This is all dependant on how much offset I would see in cost from the fuel savings over the life of the truck.

Not really. Companies are interested in the bottom line. They want to keep costs as cheap as possible and will go with the company that can provide them this. Going "green", at this time, is not economical enough (read: cheap)

Definately, bottom line perfomance again (what keeps the profits up). But I haven't seen biodiesel sold any cheaper than traditional.

 

The answer to number 1 depends on the tradeoffs to be made as part of the mileage improvements. While improvements in fuel mileage would pay off over the life of the vehicle, you have to remember that they are not free, and at some point you have to pick up the extra up front costs of purchase. I am looking at a magazine article in a truck collectors magazine, and it has an article about a semi tractor that a company purchased new in 1971. A state of the art heavy duty truck at that time cost them $20,300. In the following 36 years, the price of that same comparable piece of machinery has risen five fold. You have to have a tremendous amount of borrowing power to purchase one, and doing anything that adds to the initial up front cost either prevents you from borrowing the money, or having to pay extra costs for the privlege of borrowing such a large sum. And, your risk is higher of losing a very large investment in an accident.

So the higher initial costs, pulls the (probably) degraded performance, make it real questionable whether or not there would be an acceptable payback period for improved technology that provides higher fuel mileage, regardless of the percentage of improvement. And remember, the entire question is hypothetical, since the technologies to make this increased fuel mileage happen don't exist. If they existed and worked, the industry would be using them.

As for number 2, no, I know of no customer that is going to value a "green" fleet to haul their product, or at the very minimum I know of no one who will pay you any extra money for having such a fleet. There are companies that claim to be "green' and Walmart is famous for it, but they have gained their reputation at other peoples expense. They demand no idling on their property, regardless of weather conditions, and expect the drivers waiting on their deliveries to contribute to Walmarts green reputation. A driver who is held up for 5-6 hours at a distribution center, sitting in the midday July sun and being informed that he is not allowed to run his air conditioner because Walmart has a green image of itself may contribute to Walmarts corporate policies, but it's a pretty poor way to run a business.

As for number 3, return to number one. If there is a cheaper suitable fuel, we would be burning it. I could not afford to take the risk of burning home made fuels in a vehicle that I paid 100,000 dollars for and on which I depend for my living. That's a risk I would be unwilling to commit to, since it is me that has to pay the 15-20,000 dollar rebuild cost of an engine that gets damaged by bad fuels. Some of the money I pay when I buy fuel goes to cover the cost of repairs if my engine is damaged by bad fuels. If the motor blows up, and the cause was bad fuel, I can go back to Pilot or wherever I bought the fuel, and have recourse from my purchase. If I am burning McDonald's waste grease from the Fryolater, I have no recourse.

it's nice to envision all these perfect changes to the world, where the trucks all get great mileage, make no noise, and go about their business without having any impact on the environment. But all improvements cost money, and often they are not changes for the good. Right now, trucks produce 99% less smoke and pollutants than they did 30 years ago. making the next 1 percent in improvements is an incredibly costly process. In many places here in the states, a trucks exhaust actually has less particulate matter emitted than is in the air that it is ingesting for combustion. That means that the truck is actually running as an air purifier. At some point, there is less to be gained that the effort we expend to make the gain. We are pretty close to that "zero point" right now.

 

If you look at your local organic market, or other places practicing "green" sales, you will find tht most of the items move in relatively small quantities. Very rarely are there items that would move in truckload quantities, in the way the deliveries are done to Walmart or other larger places. One of the biggest reasons for the increasse in truckload freight, as opposed to the older days when you dropped a few pallets at a time at locations, is that the larger stores have the ability to consume product in loads equal to what one truck hauls. And in environmental terms, it's better if the truck only makes one stop at one location, vice spending all day drivingand idling as it unloads and waits at various places.

Going green in many ways is not suitable in the economic conditions that we now have. There are few consumers that will pay extra for something grown in a specific fashion, when there is a perfectly acceptable, lower priced substitute on hand.

I could buy the super stylish organic peanut butter, but Jif or Skippy works just as well for me and does the job much cheaper. There is an element of frugality in my makeup that forbids me from buying green solely for the sake of salving my social consciensce.

 

1) I would be interested in a truck with better fuel economy of coarse. But 10-15% is really a drop in the bucket when these trucks only get 5-6mpg now. There is no set dollar amount that can be tallied. You need to do a good cost analysis. What is the cost of the upgrade (or additional fee) and how much would it save me. (IE- how long would it take to recoup my extra cost in savings)

2) Shippers and Receivers could care less how much MPG your truck gets or what it does to the environment. They just care that you can pull the load on time and for cheap as passable. If I told them to pay more because I have a truck with lower MPG, they would laugh in my face and tell me it should be cheaper to haul then because it uses less fuel.

3) Bio diesel is a great idea. Problem is that it cost more to refine still and is not available throwout the nation easily. But you said to omit that. Another concern is that a lot of Manufactures still void warranties if you run Bio. On top of that there is still big debate on what it does to the reliability of an engine and if it really does get better MPG. If its cheaper then diesel, but its more expensive to run, then what is really cheaper. So, all I am saying is, if it was cheaper to run, safe on engines, excepted by the industry, and it was widely available then the industry would already has switched to it and I along with everyone would consider it.

4) Definitely don't concentrate just on fuels, check out the Frieghtliner Cascadia and International Prostar. They are boasting a massive increase in fuel economy based on aerodynamics. Its turning the industry on its head. Look into anti-idle stuff like APU's also.

 

Ok, I think everyone has pretty much coveredthings. How about this?

You want cut fuel usage, greenhouse gases, noise polution, high blood pressure, I'm sure there are many more. Give the trucks their own lane in the bigger cities. Just let them roll right on through. No stop-n-go huts (toll booths) ever been to the south side of Chicago trying to to just "pass through"? Want to help? Really help? Keep us rolling and get some big siccors to cut through all this *&(&(&$^## red tape that does no good!

Have a great day, and make a truckers day..... give em room and be polite. Remember, the medical supplies that may oneday need will be delivered by a trucker.

Boom

 

You need to get an Ipass or EZ Pass. I haven't slowed for a booth on the tollways more than a dozen times over the past 5 years. I go past most toll booths at 55 mph or better. As for truck only lanes, do a count of how many trucks are out there sometime, and try to envision all of them jammed into one lane, all accelerating at the pace of the slowest driver and truck out there. Illinois roads can always stand improvement, but truck only lanes are not the answer to the problem, IMHO.