“However, it is important to note that uncertainties lie ahead,” he said. “Long lead times and other actions beyond the control of the manufacturers, and beyond EPA’s control, are needed to assure the infrastructures essential to operating heavy-duty ZEVs are in place, in time. EPA’s final GHG Phase 3 rule works to erode near-term regulatory certainty and stability by reopening the existing 2027 GHG Phase 2 rule—a rule that we defended against rollbacks—and by assuming a level of ZEV purchasing that appears to be overly ambitious.”
The Clean Freight Coalition, made up of trucking industry groups such as ATA and the Truckload Carriers Association, opposes the new GHG3 standards.
“Today, these vehicles fail to meet the operational demands of many motor carrier applications, reduce the payload of trucks and thereby require more trucks to haul the same amount of freight, and lack sufficient charging and alternative fueling infrastructure to support adoption,” Jim Mullen, CFC executive director said. “In addition, battery electric motorcoaches have a reduced range and capacity compared to diesel buses. These commercial vehicles are in their infancy and are just now being tested and validated with real-world miles.”
The CFC recently commissioned a report outlining the many hurdles to electrifying the entire commercial trucking industry.
Roland Berger’s CFC study found that converting entirely to battery-electric vehicles would cost the industry nearly $1 trillion. That price only covers infrastructure and utility upgrades. It does not include the costs of electric trucks, which can cost more than twice as much as traditional diesel-powered tractors.
According to CFC’s Mullen, a diesel Class 8 truck costs roughly $180,000 compared to $400,000 for an electric truck. Mullen notes that these costs will be passed on to consumers.
Due to various economic and operational constraints, electrification of heavy-duty vehicles presents more significant challenges than that of medium-duty vehicles. A recent study estimates that the average cost of charging infrastructure for fleets will be significantly higher for heavy-duty vehicles, at approximately $145,000 per vehicle. In comparison, medium-duty trucks will require an investment of approximately $54,000 per vehicle.
“The GHG Phase 3 rule will have detrimental ramifications to the commercial vehicle industry, many small and large businesses, commercial vehicle dealers and their customers,” Mullen said.
See also: It’s not too early to think about your fleet’s future power
Environmental backing and concerns
While trucking groups point to the large price tags and projects needed to actually decarbonize U.S. freight—more than 70% of which travels by truck—the EPA claims its plan will eventually save fleets money.
“The HD industry will save approximately $3.5 billion in operating costs (e.g., savings that come from less liquid fuel used, lower maintenance and repair costs for ZEV technologies as compared to ICE technologies, etc.),” regulators wrote in the final rule.
According to government estimates, the EPA’s clean truck standards could reduce one billion metric tons of climate pollution by 2055. They also reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxides by 53,000 tons in 2055.
“Today, the Environmental Protection Agency took another key step in our journey toward a future with less traffic pollution—a future that will deliver cleaner air for our children, healthier communities, and a safer climate,” said Amanda Leland, executive director of Environmental Defense Fund.
Guillermo Ortiz, a clean vehicles advocate at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that the truck tailpipe solution has worsened climate change and public health.
“These EPA standards will help protect our families from dangerous pollution while steering us toward a safer climate,” he said. “This rule could have done more. Our nation needs a vision to eliminate pollution from the freight transportation system. Every wheeze, every gasp for breath in communities impacted by the movement of freight serves as a reminder of the urgency to act. The federal government needs to fully address this scourge on our families.”
On the other side, ATA claims that the EPA’s final rule will drive only battery-electric and hydrogen power developments, which will limit fleets’ choices among early-stage technology that is yet to be proven beyond some regional applications.
See also: Latest oils and lubricants for heavy-duty fleets
“The trucking industry is fully committed to the road to zero emissions, but the path to get there must be paved with commonsense,” Spear said. “While we are disappointed with today’s rule, we will continue to work with EPA to address its shortcomings and advance emission-reduction targets and timelines that are both realistic and durable.”
CFC’s Mullen urged the government to support lower carbon alternatives—such as biodiesel and renewables—instead of focusing only on zero-emission technology.
“These lower-carbon fuels will allow EPA to make progress on emissions today while the industry implements longer-term options,” Mullen argued. “Mandating a transition to technology that is decades away from being viable at scale will keep older, less environmentally friendly commercial vehicles on the road longer, stunting the carbon reduction progress EPA seeks.”
Editorial Director Kevin Jones contributed to this report.
Credit: Source link
