FED EX vs T. Boone Pickens?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Oscar on January 18, 2009 at 9:55am

The hybrid trucks improve fuel economy by 42 percent, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 30 percent and cut particulate pollution by 96 percent.

Just think how much cleaner these numbers would be if they used CNG/electric instread of gasoline. 50%? 100%?

The likely process behind the decision is the availability of the fuel. The investment required to supply CNG to a national fleet could be quite formidible.

FED-EX is moving in the right direction and perhaps will move further in the near future as vehicles need replacing and the CNG infrastructure becomes more prevelent.

Here we are with the chicken and the egg again.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Rand Carawan on January 18, 2009 at 4:20pm

Energybloggers, My understanding was that earlier, Mr. Pickens had proposed that CNG was the way to go for trucks. If we could migrate 18 wheelers and other lighter trucks to run on CNG, the abundant natural resource we do not need to import, then we would reduce our oil dependancy on foreign imports. Again, Mr. Pickens said this would perhaps only be a bridge for 20 years until other renewable energies are available with technology advanced sufficient for mass production. CNG is available now for this purpose in most trucks. As for electric vehicles, I wonder how it is that the former totally electric GM vehicle, the E-1, was leased for some years, years ago, the charging stations constructed at various locations and in the leasers home garages, then as quickly as they appeared, they faded away. If Congress and the Senate could mandate for 2010 that all government trucks be run on CNG, and all cars be fully electric, GM could earn billions on cars people want. At 40K/car, GM could probably sell 500K cars to GOV buyers for 20 billion. At 60K/car they could maybe get 30 billion. Why did the E-1 fade away? Was it an infrastructure problem or battery technology. Anything is better than gasoline.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Debra Goldenberg on January 19, 2009 at 7:40pm

Electric does the best as far as pollution. Depends too on whether CNG infrastructure can be installed to make it convenient enough for everyone.

Thanks for the Fed-Ex article, their work on hybrid electric vehicles is very promising!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve Willmorth on January 21, 2009 at 5:19pm

Hybrid electric trucks may well be in the future. The far off future. Pickens plan to energize class 5, 6, and 7 trucks is now. Clean Energy is building fueling stations here in the west as fast as they can go.

But. Picken's plan is to build a bridge to the future. He isn't touting CNG as the fuel of the future. It's just a way to get us there.

Fleet vehicles alone account for 38% of our oil use .Police cars, ambulances, taxis, buses, and delivery trucks fit into this category. Big over the road trucks are included here, but most of them will continue to use diesel for now, because of power considerations, and the general lack of infrastructure.

It is 35 miles round trip for a parcel to be delivered to me via Fed Ex. Almost half of that is uphill 6% grade or higher. There is not a class 5 truck available today that would be able to leave the Fed EX dock, deliver to my house and return to base. UPS, on the other hand has a CNG truck that can do just that tomorrow.

Fred Smith doesn't seem to be a guy that relies on technology that isn't developed yet to deliver a parcel, is he? Seems like that is just so.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by neil cox on January 21, 2009 at 10:19pm

Very few parcels need to be delivered on a 6% grade 17 miles long. I'm surprised that typical class 5 trucks can't manage 6% grades, but I do recall my car lost traction and threw gravel on an 8% grade. Perhaps 4 wheel drive is what is needed? Neil

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve Willmorth on January 22, 2009 at 11:11am

Any class 5 truck can climb the grade, I.m saying that no class 5 electric/hybrid powered will do it. Sorry for the confusing sentence.

Why is the Fed Ex plan getting such raves? They have been touting electric hybrid for years. They once said they would have their whole fleet (33,000 trucks) converted to Electric hybrid by now. Instead, they have converted..what? 317 trucks? And they want us to know that their plan of conversion has saved soo much fuel. Heck, UPS has saved more diesel by implementing a program that changes their routes to minimize left turns!

Like I said, there will be a time when fuel saving electric cars and trucks will be here. All I'm saying is that time hasn't come yet. And, until there are drastic changes in electric storage, there will never be a bigger freight hauler than a 1 ton truck.

And, like Boone said, we aren't getting off the foreign oil merry-go-round by stubbornly hanging on to something that doesn't work.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by neil cox on January 22, 2009 at 8:10pm

Electric vehicles do have limited range and a fast recharge is not possible many places, but 4 wheel drive with very high torque or very high speed are practical. With a hybrid, I can see the electric motor can draw more power, than the gasoline motor can replace climbing a very long steep hill. That is fixed by a lower gear, or a battery with more capacity or a gasoline motor with more horsepower = all rather simple engineering problems, unless the hill is steep for 50 miles. Even then you could park for a few minutes, occasionally to let the gasoline motor recharge the battery. In theory, we can build hybrids where both the battery and the gasoline motor simultaniously power the wheels over difficult terrain. electric in back; gasoline in front.
If there are steep ups and downs, the dynamic breaking partially recharges the battery on the down slopes. Neil

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Michael Seleway on January 25, 2009 at 1:37pm

Fuel Cell Power auto engines wouldn't just slow transfer of wealth and slow the pace of environmental damage from motor vehicles, they would STOP it. FCP emissions = H2O and some heat. While Fuel Cell Powered vehicles are in their infancy, a few auto manufacturers have proven FCP vehicles on the road, today. We could solve the motor vehicle problem for future generations if we focus on, and invest in, the sound long-term solution, rather than an interim improvement 'bridge'. Plug-in electrics just move pollution offenses from autos to electrc utility companies supplying them.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Oscar on February 21, 2009 at 11:25pm

FCVs will be great, but long term. We need energy independence now. CNG has the ability to be for the masses now and it is clean and low cost. A renewable and sustainable option.

Hydrogen is the cleanest but producing it in northern climates requires reforming NG. Why not use the NG straight up? H2 provides 2 hyrogen atoms per molecule. NG (CH4) provides 4 hydrogen atoms per molecule. The atom of CO2? Well, even my breath expells CO2 and plants absorb it unlike the hydrocarbons.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve Willmorth on March 6, 2009 at 7:38pm

I guess Coca Cola hasn't read my post about Electric Hybrid trucks don't work (!).

Here is a link to an article about KW class 5-7 trucks

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by SJC on March 7, 2009 at 9:44am

If you are replacing trucks, then hybrids make sense. If you are retrofitting existing trucks, CNG dual fueled may be more cost effective. I would like to see all the new trucks be CNG dual fuel hybrids. We could really reduce the use of oil if local trucks, school buses and city transit buses were all of this type, over time.

▶ Reply to This