AutoblogGreen

"Longer-range ideas include creating truck-only corridors which would permit carriers to further increase the use of more productive vehicles."

I think we already have those... aren't they called rail-roads?

If trucking companies had to pay for the damage they do to the roadways (as rail companies do) there would be almost no more trucking in 10 years. Damage to the roadway increases as about the cube of the vehicle weight, so

My 1000 kg Civic : 1 unit of damage
A 3000 kg Hummer: 27 units of damage
A 20,000 kg semi: 8000 units of damage

So shouldn't a semi pay about 8000 times as much tax towards road maintenance? As car drivers we subsidize trucking by providing them a place to roll.

Reply

Railroads are more efficient, but they can't go anywhere that there isn't a track, so that limits their reach. Ttrucks are required to get to the streets and neighborhoods.

And if the trucking companies paid 8,000 times as much on road maintenance, the prices of the things we all buy as consumers should at least quadruple. Would that be fair and good for the economy and our pocketbooks?

These companies don't truck stuff for fun. They do it for commerce that we all rely on. If you don't want to depend on trucking, don't buy goods that gets transported by anything but a bicycle from anywhere besides your town.

The truckers should reduce speeds, idle less and buy more efficient vehicles, so the ATA 6 point plan is a good thing. Road trains are questionable from a safety/environmental trade-off standpoint though.

Reply

The sooner the trucking industry realizes they're not in the trucking business, but in the "moving crap from A to B at defined times" business, the sooner they'll stop suggesting stupid things like road trains and dedicated highways, and partner up with actual trains (and intermodal "regional superhubs") instead.

As the price of diesel continues to rise, the ones that don't get this nuance will go out of business.

Reply

I dont think that they can be all that effcien twith 9mpg but mind you they still are trucks and have to pull 40,000 pound loads but this is a start

Reply

Trucks get around 7 mpg which for a typical 80,000 lb truck/trailer combo is 560,000 lb-miles/gal. A Prius which gets 45 mpg and weighs 3,200 lbs gets 144,000 lb-miles/gal. So if you look at it that way, trucks are way more efficient, (although it's really efficacy not efficiency). This is because they use diesels and their power-to-weight ratio is much lower, (which is why they can't accelerate very quickly compared to a car).

Reply

With only 2% of the vehicles on the road being long-haul trucks, they produce 30% of our emissions. I agree the ATA is doing a very good thing by implementing this plan.

Reply

Disclaimer: I work for ATA and was involved in putting the plan together.

@GoodCheer: What's the source of your information on road damage?

@UH2L: Thanks for the opinions. Yes, the larger the vehicle typically the more efficient it is on a ton basis. Keep in mind too that something like 86% of communities in the US are accessible only by truck and not rail.

@Josh: Thanks for the compliment. Also, keep in mind the number of trucks to passenger cars is not an accurate indicator. The important metric is VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled). Trucks are business assets and are thus utilized a lot more than cars. Plus they are not driven for discretionary purposes.

Finally, if anyone wants to see a rough comparison between the efficiencies of trucks and cars on a per-ton basis you might find this post I wrote a little surprising:

http://www.automanifesto.com/2008/03/60-mpg-hummers.html

Reply

Fumes emission is real problem. Changing old making environmental problems, cars on something safer is essential need. Try to find something for yourself with that company http://www.truckersservices.com/ check that site and take care of earth.

Reply